# 2016 Trek Farley 5, 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 Fat Bikes



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

*

The 2016 Trek Fat Bikes are officially up on their website now, bringing a whopping 5 new models to the mix.

Here's the models, pricing, and links:*

*Farley 5 w/ MSRP of $1,729.99*
Farley 5 - New! - Trek Bicycle

*Farley 7 w/ MSRP of $2,399.99*
Farley 7 - New! - Trek Bicycle
*
Farley 9 w/ MSRP of $3,199.99
*Farley 9 - New! - Trek Bicycle

*Farley 9.6 w/ MSRP of $2,999.99
*Farley 9.6 - New! - Trek Bicycle

*Farley 9.8 w/ MSRP of $4,799.99
*Farley 9.8 - New! - Trek Bicycle

* Discuss!

*8/21 Updated Pricing Map*


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

We've been discussing, but someone decided the discussion should be consolidated into the 2015 Farley thread - not sure why.

Anyhoo. the 7 seems to be the sweet spot, and that's the one I have on order.
Getting the 5 for my wife. I may end up building up a second wheelset for it @ 27.5 just for grins.


----------



## bcriverjunky (Jul 8, 2014)

Looks like they are going to keep the 6-8 models.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

Gambit21 congrats on your Farley 7 pre-order! I think I would have sprung for the 7 if it were a different color.

bcriverjunky my dealer said once the 6's and 8's are gone, they're gone, and they have no more coming in.

My Farley 5 is expected to arrive mid-late August. Woohoo! Can't wait!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I go back and forth on the purple. It's growing on me I think. (I wish it was orange) I hate the odd blue and green scheme of the 9.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

Are most of these new models for fitting tires bigger than 4.0 ?
[2015 farley 6 it is clear you cannot go bigger than 4.0....]

IMHO, for me....4.0 or 3.8 is plenty for a fatbike incl snow, but for even more snow ability you haveta go bigger.


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

Yes, that, and slight changes to geometry, and their own expanded rim and tire sizes.

Like you, I own a Farley 6, and have not found myself in need of bigger tires. Would be nice, but with all the fat bikes I test rode, and how perfect this one fits me, I am cool with that.

Also, I read from multiple people that Dillinger 5s fit in the rear.


----------



## bwheelies (May 29, 2015)

I just got the Fatboy SE but the good axles, factory hydro brakes, the 1x11... I would have bought that.

Colors seem odd except on base model.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

tyriverag said:


> Yes, that, and slight changes to geometry, and their own expanded rim and tire sizes.
> 
> Like you, I own a Farley 6, and have not found myself in need of bigger tires. Would be nice, but with all the fat bikes I test rode, and how perfect this one fits me, I am cool with that.
> 
> Also, I read from multiple people that Dillinger 5s fit in the rear.


in rear ? will need to research that....
wow here it is

2015 Trek Farley 6 and 8 fat Bikes - Page 23- Mtbr.com

anywho...9 years on an original super-tank pugsley (yes with SS cog on front and large marge heavies) and swapped to Farley 6 tubeless...like night and day!!!!!


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

bwheelies said:


> Colors seem odd except on base model.


This! They aren't bad, just odd indeed.


----------



## Blinkz (Apr 20, 2015)

I really like that purple color of the 7. I would have picked one up but I got to impatient and went with something else haha.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

moshock said:


> This! They aren't bad, just odd indeed.


With regard to the new models - Grey is fine, so is the purple. The blue/green scheme is ugly and just poor design imho (I happen to be a designer) The upper 9 models after that aren't ugly, just unremarkable.

I may end up with a grey and orange 7 (dealer is willing to swap parts) but haven't decided yet. The purple is kinda nice too...


----------



## bcriverjunky (Jul 8, 2014)

You are not going to fit a D5 on the rear of a 6 or a 8


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

bcriverjunky said:


> You are not going to fit a D5 on the rear of a 6 or a 8


I've seen a few that fit them when the tire was new, however given time to stretch it usually results in rub.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

took another long look at farley 6 17.5 with hodag and that thing barely clears 

I agree a 5 ain't gonna fit unless it's really skinny 5


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

I love the color on the 9, the rest are so-so, don't hate any of them, don't love any of them. Wouldn't keep me from buying one. Can't wait to see one in person. I have a friend with a 9.8 on order. Can't freaking wait to see and ride it.


----------



## bcriverjunky (Jul 8, 2014)

New Trek Video.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

Thanks for sharing! Cool video!


----------



## Gigantic (Aug 31, 2012)

the frame size inflation is aggravating; what they call a 21.5" frame, actually has a 20.5" seat tube, which effectively rules that out as a possibility. That's a shame, my team is having a bike buying night next month (we're sponsored by Trek & Bontrager) and we'd get the bikes at dealer cost. <sigh> looks like i'll be getting a Boone CX or a Fuel, instead and a Ventana this fall.


----------



## Bryan1113 (Feb 21, 2013)

damn these new farleys look sweet...actually thinking of dumping my Surly for one


----------



## Sparky697 (Feb 10, 2015)

Gigantic said:


> the frame size inflation is aggravating; what they call a 21.5" frame, actually has a 20.5" seat tube, which effectively rules that out as a possibility. That's a shame, my team is having a bike buying night next month (we're sponsored by Trek & Bontrager) and we'd get the bikes at dealer cost. <sigh> looks like i'll be getting a Boone CX or a Fuel, instead and a Ventana this fall.


Even though it's 20.5 shouldn't it still fit like a 21.5?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

Ya everything I know with trek is they run shorter seat tube for better stand over but the frame fit is the "inflated size". One of those "dont worry about the numbers so dang much, test it out" things.  I actually like that trek (provided its being done right) is puttin stand over more into the equation by building the frame to fit at "listed size" then cutting the seat tube lower to give the boys a little more room. We all aren't all legs you know.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

Another new Farley video: 




That blue Farley 9 looks pretty cool!


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Have the 9 on order,my LBS gave me a could not refuse price for one 
,plus the 27.5 was a major incentive!


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

I was looking at the build sheets between the Farley 7 and the 9.6 and they seem like they are pretty much the same builds except for the tire wheel combo. So my question is what will be the weight different between the aluminum frame of the 7 and the carbon frame of the 9.6?


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

the 9.6 seems like oneheckofa value!


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

newmarketrog said:


> the 9.6 seems like oneheckofa value!


AND....it has thru axles


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

litespeedaddict said:


> AND....it has thru axles


yes, i noticed


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

techfersure said:


> Have the 9 on order,my LBS gave me a could not refuse price for one
> ,plus the 27.5 was a major incentive!


On that note - if anyone walks into a Trek dealer and they quote you the MSRP on the Trek site and won't budge - walk away and go to another dealer. Be looking for $200 off that MSRP at least. I did a little better because I bought 2 bikes.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

newmarketrog said:


> the 9.6 seems like oneheckofa value!


Yep, but the 7 is the best bang for the buck in the lot IMO.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

is there a difference between map and msrp?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

newmarketrog said:


> is there a difference between map and msrp?


That I'm not sure of - I just know that a high volume Trek dealer has some room on these.
I think even a lower volume dealer has a bit of room since that MSRP is inflated a bit to allow for this.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

been a loooong time since i sold trek, so i can't even remember how their pricing works or what the margins are depending on volume brought in.

i know i hardly ever ordered from Q when i sold trek cuz bontrager offered a pretty complete selection of parts/accessories and i automatically saved 5-10% on those orders by being a trek dealer. make money in the buying, not the selling


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

newmarketrog said:


> the 9.6 seems like oneheckofa value!


Yeah- I'd put money down on one as a snow bike if I could get it with 26" wheels. The 27.5"s might work for those on groomed trails, but I'm usually the trailer groomer....


----------



## Gigantic (Aug 31, 2012)

Sparky697 said:


> Even though it's 20.5 shouldn't it still fit like a 21.5?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


not if you have a 35" inseam...


----------



## Chad_M (Jul 11, 2013)

Does the 5 or 7 have thru axles on both front and rear. It looks as though the front is still QR?


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

It looks like the 5 is QR and the 7 is thru axle.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

ava likes the 5 and doesn't mind qr's at all. and daddy don't care so long as wifey leaves the house unlocked and ava calls me dada. 42 with an 8 month old......livin the dream yo!


the 5 has the best color. love the orange lettering


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

What's QR vs Thru Axle? Benefits or downsides?


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

moshock said:


> What's QR vs Thru Axle? Benefits or downsides?


Smoke n mirrors.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

moshock said:


> What's QR vs Thru Axle? Benefits or downsides?


TA, while probably the solution you'd arrive at if designing a bike for the first time right now, offers little if any true, quantifiable advantage in the rear or with a rigid fork. It offers much needed stabity and stiffness with a suspension fork.
Stories of rear hub flex (therefore thru-axle) are BS in my opinion. With a tightened QR and laced wheel there's no place for the hub flanges to go.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

Haha a suspension fork already has too much unnecessary flex and movement to begin with, what's the problem with having more? Might as well have a bit of side to side to go with all that up n down and all that extra weight leading you thru hill and dale. Lol!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

What, don't you love it when your lateral energy is absorbed and turned into vertical energy and you lose momentum?


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

newmarketrog said:


> been a loooong time since i sold trek, so i can't even remember how their pricing works or what the margins are depending on volume brought in.
> 
> i know i hardly ever ordered from Q when i sold trek cuz bontrager offered a pretty complete selection of parts/accessories and i automatically saved 5-10% on those orders by being a trek dealer. make money in


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

Gambit21 said:


> On that note - if anyone walks into a Trek dealer and they quote you the MSRP on the Trek site and won't budge - walk away and go to another dealer. Be looking for $200 off that MSRP at least. I did a little better because I bought 2 bikes.


2550.00 for Farley 9 , LBS loyalty pays off ! can't wait until it comes in !


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

moshock said:


> What's QR vs Thru Axle? Benefits or downsides?


All you need to know is you want them. If you buy a new fatbike now without them, all you need to know is your local shop is glad you walked thru the door and took it off their hands.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

litespeedaddict said:


> All you need to know is you want them. If you buy a new fatbike now without them, all you need to know is your local shop is glad you walked thru the door and took it off their hands.


I pre-ordered a Farley 5. Is it QR or Thru Axle? Still don't know what the physical difference is.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

litespeedaddict said:


> All you need to know is you want them. If you buy a new fatbike now without them, all you need to know is your local shop is glad you walked thru the door and took it off their hands.


spiked koolaid. you 3 sheets to the wind yet?


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

moshock said:


> I pre-ordered a Farley 5. Is it QR or Thru Axle? Still don't know what the physical difference is.


If you don't know if your bike has either, or what the difference is, you won't be able to detect the very subtle differences between the two when riding. I wouldn't let this affect a bike purchase decision.

Honestly I think the biggest benefit of going TA is so you don't have to listen to people preaching the benefits of them lol.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

tyriverag said:


> If you don't know if your bike has either, or what the difference is, you won't be able to detect the very subtle differences between the two when riding. I wouldn't let this affect a bike purchase decision.
> 
> Honestly I think the biggest benefit of going TA is so you don't have to listen to people preaching the benefits of them lol.


You mite bee meye fave poster twodae


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

moshock said:


> I pre-ordered a Farley 5. Is it QR or Thru Axle? Still don't know what the physical difference is.


TA rear, QR front.

Cute kid Rog.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

Gambit21 said:


> TA rear, QR front.
> 
> Cute kid Rog.


thanx!


----------



## zeb (May 21, 2006)

Is it possible to use same RF crankset that works on 2015 model with new 2016 frame?

This was found on bikerumour site:
The 26×5 are what Trek considers the size for exploration. Still ideal for loose or soft terrain, the bigger tires were made possible thanks to the wider rear end, but the pressfit 121 bottom bracket keeps the same q factor as the 177 bikes previously.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

Anyone know when the 16's will start hitting dealer floors? I'm getting anxious!


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

moshock said:


> Anyone know when the 16's will start hitting dealer floors? I'm getting anxious!


Sept/Oct and this may only be if your dealer and/or customer preordered them.


----------



## lwkwafi (Jan 29, 2006)

Hmm, that 7 though. 
Now I am even more upset that the FatCaad is pretty tame/ugly compared to the purple 7, or even what looks to be the orange Fatboy comp. Just wish fatboy was 150TA front in case I felt crazy enough to get a bluto for summer fun.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

that new fatboi comp looks super tasty. nice to see the rf turbine cinch and 1x on it. i'd ride that bike fer sure, and i just might. or get a frame/fork and put some dt swiss wheels on it.


----------



## lwkwafi (Jan 29, 2006)

newmarketrog said:


> that new fatboi comp looks super tasty. nice to see the rf turbine cinch and 1x on it. i'd ride that bike fer sure, and i just might. or get a frame/fork and put some dt swiss wheels on it.


That does make me more interested in the fatboy for sure. 1x and ROaRANGE is the fastest color, or so I hear. Wonder if the rims set up tubeless easy. And if I am honest, it will be a bit before I jump to bluto since this is a winter purchase in central PA. I can always build new wheels if I go full-fat.

Every time I work at the shop I check to see if they have new releases on the dealer site. I did see they have some new merino wool jerseys, which should come in cheaper than any rapha stuff (and hopefully nice enough).


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

ya i tried front suspension forks over 20 years ago and have owned them here and there since. suspension forks would be the ticket if they didn't move at all and were pounds lighter

i've never been sold on front squish no matter how rough and tough the riding/racing gets. fat tires at low pressure makes squish of any kind even more senseless. imo


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

I'm with rog. I raged my Farley 6 last night in one gear, and was on the tail of a better rider (skills not engine) on a carbon Bucksaw last night. He usually stays ahead of me on rides, because my coordination is low, and tendency to fly off the trail is high. What I would lose on more technical sections, I'd make up for in climbs and straight shots.


----------



## lwkwafi (Jan 29, 2006)

The concept that all suspension is useless is silly, and could just more dependent upon your location. I can't really imagine enjoying rigid on all of these #eastcoastrocks. Hell, even Rich Dillen opted for a squish fork for a stage or two of the Transylvania Epic race. 

But I can probably live rigid for the fatbike, as it won't be the real gnar bike of choice for me.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

It's not a location thing


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

Gambit21 said:


> It's not a location thing


nope^^^^^^^^ come ride where i ride and you might want a full on dh rig

maine is pretty chunky to say the least.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I might or might not - it's not a location thing, it's a preference thing.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

Gambit21 said:


> I might or might not - it's not a location thing, it's a preference thing.


i was speaking to lwkwafi.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Never mind, I thought I was still speaking to him as well. Damn phone and tiny screen


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

Gambit21 said:


> Never mind, I thought I was still speaking to him as well. Damn phone and tiny screen


HA! looking forward to your purple beauty? or did you get it already?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

newmarketrog said:


> HA! looking forward to your purple beauty? or did you get it already?


Getting the 7 and a 5 for the wife, finances dictate that they will go on layaway for a while after they arrive.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

Gambit21 said:


> Getting the 7 and a 5 for the wife, finances dictate that they will go on layaway for a while after they arrive.


hey gotta do whatcha gotta do


----------



## billbiwer (Jul 30, 2015)

I just went in to pre-order a new Farley 5 and the sales guy recommended I go with a 19.5 based on my 5'10" height and 32" inseam. I assumed I would best fit on a 17.5 but he explained that for around here (Minneapolis, MN) I'd primarily be riding in not very deep snow and occasionally deeper stuff. 

My intended use for the bike will most likely be a daily commuter (in winter), single track (4 season) and I'd like to also be able do some exploring on unplowed/ungroomed stuff as well. So a little of everything. He recommended that if the 19.5 felt to big on deeper stuff I could get a dropper post to help.

I know the best route is to just try them out, but they didn't have any of last years models to try unfortunately. He said if I didn't like how the 19.5 feels/rides after they get it in I could switch to a 17.5.

I'm just curious if people here think this all checks out. It'll also be my first foray into mountain biking and I don't want to end up on something to big to comfortably maneuver. I trust what the guy is saying, just want to get some second opinions.


Thanks.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

billbiwer said:


> I just went in to pre-order a new Farley 5 and the sales guy recommended I go with a 19.5 based on my 5'10" height and 32" inseam. I assumed I would best fit on a 17.5 but he explained that for around here (Minneapolis, MN) I'd primarily be riding in not very deep snow and occasionally deeper stuff.
> 
> My intended use for the bike will most likely be a daily commuter (in winter), single track (4 season) and I'd like to also be able do some exploring on unplowed/ungroomed stuff as well. So a little of everything. He recommended that if the 19.5 felt to big on deeper stuff I could get a dropper post to help.
> 
> ...


honestly, that "salesguy" should find something else to do. if yer 5'10 yer gonna be a lot closer to a 17.5 than a 19.5. recommending putting a dropper on to help is stoopid.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yeah - saves me a post. I was going to respond earlier but too long to type with the phone.
Rog, I got a call from the shop. I'm heading down tomorrow -I think they want to try and talk me into a Stache 29+. Probably just because they have them in stock now, and they're so enamored with this model themselves from what it sounds like.

I've never been on a 29+ - thoughts?

Seems to me the Farley is close to the Stache, just a little more evolved even. There's less than an inch difference in chainstay length (in case the "wow, look at that short chainstay" argument comes up. So then I'm left with capability, and from where I sit the Stache is limited to 3" tires, where on the Farley I can run 27.5+ (3" and upwards) if I feel like it, all the way up to 4.8" on the 26" wheels. So not sure what their thinking, but I have to run down there and change the wife's bike order to a Helga anyway, so I'll hear them out.

I'm counting on 27.5x65mm wheels being released, couple that with 4" tires and the Farley and I don't think I'll be thinking about the Stache.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

Gambit21 said:


> Yeah - saves me a post. I was going to respond earlier but too long to type with the phone.
> Rog, I got a call from the shop. I'm heading down tomorrow -I think they want to try and talk me into a Stache 29+. Probably just because they have them in stock now, and they're so enamored with this model themselves from what it sounds like.
> 
> I've never been on a 29+ - thoughts?
> ...


so i had a customer of mine (i mainly do repair work on bikes that he buys elsewhere due to brands he prefers) pull in with a sexy @ss brandy new stache 5, the one that has kinda that bianchi celeste thang going. SICK LOOKING BIKE. light and sexy for the money. if i were gonna stache it up i'd definitely go with that one.

problem for me is, the fvcking wheels are HUDGE. i've been a 29er devotee since 03' but having tried 29+, imo, the wheels feel way to big. i like flicky and i ride where it's twisty turny techy wicked frequent steep up/down.

27.5+ seems like the ticket to me and i guess you can run them on that bike if you want.

only problem is you can't run fat tires on it, but why would you? go farley if you want that.

why would you go + on a fatbike or regular skinny wheels on a plus bike? THAT i just don't get.

again tho, the bike looks SICK!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yeah that green is the one I'd pull the trigger on too - swapped with the 7 build kit tho.
I ride a trail with a few turns that are 6' radius - so I'd be worried a bit about those huge wheels as well.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

the plastic fork is legit too. seamless with the frame. this customer sold his sweet blue alu beargrease and is gonna run the stache all winter in the snow cuz honeybadger don't give a $hit

i'll prolly hook up with him as he wants to check out the killer dozens of miles of snowmo trails that are near my house. i'll get to see how his wagon wheel 3's do compared to my 4's


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

As a owner of a 6 i would be getting a 7. Adding some blue to it and riding the hell out of it! 150 front? Could ad a bluto and would have a cheaper nicer 9 with 5" tires and a less expensive drive to destroy in the winter.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

solarplex said:


> As a owner of a 6 i would be getting a 7. Adding some blue to it and riding the hell out of it! 150 front? Could ad a bluto and would have a cheaper nicer 9 with 5" tires and a less expensive drive to destroy in the winter.


Yep - with my DTswiss rims and hubs, XT brakes and Enve bar I figure l'll have a Farley 10


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

billbiwer said:


> I just went in to pre-order a new Farley 5 and the sales guy recommended I go with a 19.5 based on my 5'10" height and 32" inseam. I assumed I would best fit on a 17.5 but he explained that for around here (Minneapolis, MN) I'd primarily be riding in not very deep snow and occasionally deeper stuff.
> 
> My intended use for the bike will most likely be a daily commuter (in winter), single track (4 season) and I'd like to also be able do some exploring on unplowed/ungroomed stuff as well. So a little of everything. He recommended that if the 19.5 felt to big on deeper stuff I could get a dropper post to help.
> 
> ...


I'm 5'11" with a 32" inseam. I _also_ thought 17.5" would be correct for me, but my dealer (two guys that both own fatbikes themselves) highly recommended the 19.5" as well. I did test ride a 15.5" Farley which felt small, did a _lot_ of reading online, and ultimately decided the 19.5" (18.5" actual frame size mind you) seemed legit. I pre-ordered it.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

moshock said:


> I'm 5'11" with a 32" inseam. I _also_ thought 17.5" would be correct for me, but my dealer (two guys that both own fatbikes themselves) highly recommended the 19.5" as well. I did test ride a 15.5" Farley which felt small, did a _lot_ of reading online, and ultimately decided the 19.5" (18.5" actual frame size mind you) seemed legit. I pre-ordered it.


yer 5'11", not 5'10". i'm 5'11.5 and wear 32 pant and i'm 19.5 fer sure. but if i were 5'10" with similar leg length, my reach might not be ideal for the 19.5 and closer to 17.5.


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

I generally ride "medium" sized bikes (17ish-18ish) and went with the 17.5 Farley 6. It supposedly fits like a size 16.5. I did ride the 19.5 (fits like an 18.5), and am about 5'10.5", no idea what my inseam was. They both felt pretty similar, with the 17.5 feeling a hair more comfortable.


----------



## newmarketrog (Sep 26, 2008)

17.5 fits like a typical medium, 19.5 fits like a typical large.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

newmarketrog said:


> yer 5'11", not 5'10".


Thanks for reminding me, LOL.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Is the Trek 9.6 / 9.8 carbon frame available in a frame only option? Would love to swap over what I have onto one of those.


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

Yes, the 9.8 will be. At least according to the dealer site. No eta though. May just be listed for future warranty claims?

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## sailor_74 (Jul 14, 2015)

I wish bike companies would start to make their bikes longer I'm 5"10 with 32" inseam and would want the 21.5" frame for the correct reach but I wouldn't have space to run a dropper seatpost as the seat tube is too long.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Uhh...if you need an XL frame for proper reach at 5'10" your inseam isn't the story here.


----------



## sailor_74 (Jul 14, 2015)

What can I say, wide bars short stem improve handling no end, but only when the frame is long enough.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Still not making sense from a fit standpoint, the bikes have short stems.


----------



## sailor_74 (Jul 14, 2015)

The XL has a 444mm reach, the same as my large enduro 650b which is spot on for me with a 50mm stem.
I guess it comes down to how/where you ride. With the exception of a DH track I ride my fatbike in all the same places I ride my 160mm enduro, so for me at least a similar fit would be the goal


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

So came in to a built Farley 5 19.5









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

If you can, throw/hold (I know the hub is different) a set of Stache 29+ wheels in there and see how much clearance there is. I'm curious.


----------



## tschram72 (Oct 21, 2012)

That's awesome! Does this mean that the Farley's are starting to roll in? I pre-ordered a 7 and can't wait to get my hands on it!


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

FYI: Looks like Trek dropped the MSRP across the board on the Farleys's

9.8: $4799
9.6: $2999
9:$3199
7:$2399
5:$1729

Farley - Trek Bicycle

9.8 is really tempting. Would look really nice with the correct sized DT Swiss BR2250 wheels I just ordered. I wonder what I could sell the carbon 27.5" wheels and tires for?


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Sorry no 29+ stuff around here. They came in completely unexpected. Not sure how soon the others will ship. I have a 9.8 on order...can't wait!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

Thanks for sharing the Farley 5 pic Natedeezy, can't wait to pick mine up soon!


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

Put my deposit down on a Farley today. Only one they have in the local shop now is a 5 but I am wanting either a 7 or 9.6 so it sounds like I will have first chance at whichever shows up first in my size. Can't really decide which until I can actually see them in person. I can see pros and cons to both. Do I really need a 4.7 in tire, but is the new 27.5 rim really necessary? On top of that, The owner of the store keeps trying to sell me the 9.8. I think that is way too much bike for my needs. At this point, it doesn't sound like I really have to make my decision until October, that is when they are scheduled to arrive. What would be youur model choice?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Fuzzwardo said:


> What would be youur model choice?


Haven't we been answering that?


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

I'm busy researching the 27.5x4 wheels now but the bike I think I want is the 9.6. It's going to be ridden primarily in the winter and on tracks made by snowmobiles or on the sand near the water (packed). Since we get some freeze/thaw here, I'll probably add studs to the tires. I don't need or want suspension at this point. The 27.5's are probably a good improvement over the 26x4's in terms of patch size.

If the 27.5's don't work, then I'll get a set of 26x5 wheels and have the best of both worlds. So that would be the downside.

J.


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

JohnJ80 said:


> I'm busy researching the 27.5x4 wheels now but the bike I think I want is the 9.6. It's going to be ridden primarily in the winter and on tracks made by snowmobiles . Since we get some freeze/thaw here, I'll probably add studs to the tires. I don't need or want suspension at this point. The 27.5's are probably a good improvement over the 26x4's in terms of patch size.
> 
> If the 27.5's don't work, then I'll get a set of 26x5 wheels and have the best of both worlds. So that would be the downside.
> 
> J.


This is pretty much where I stand right now. The only downside would be dropping a large amount of money on a 2nd wheel set.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

7, second summer wheel set maybe.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

JohnJ80 said:


> I'm busy researching the 27.5x4 wheels now but the bike I think I want is the 9.6. It's going to be ridden primarily in the winter and on tracks made by snowmobiles or on the sand near the water (packed). Since we get some freeze/thaw here, I'll probably add studs to the tires. I don't need or want suspension at this point. The 27.5's are probably a good improvement over the 26x4's in terms of patch size.
> 
> If the 27.5's don't work, then I'll get a set of 26x5 wheels and have the best of both worlds. So that would be the downside.
> 
> J.


The knob height/design of the 27.5 tires will determine if you can add studs. You'll need suitable knob width and and at least 5mm depth for grip studs.

I'm still skeptical on the 27.5x3.8" tires performance in the snow. They would have a slightly longer contact patch, but their low profile sidewalks will really limit how low of a psi you can run due to the risk of dinging a rim. 3-4psi would get expensive really quick.

Don't really have any options if they don't grip well either, aside from buying 26" wheels, as the only other available 27.5" tires at this point are skinnier. No studded options in 27.5 either at this point.


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

Paochow said:


> Don't really have any options if they don't grip well either, aside from buying 26" wheels, as the only other available 27.5" tires at this point are skinnier.


For anyone in the UK, for a while you won't even have the option to put a new 27.5" Hodag on if you wreck one beyond repair. According to Trek they're not going to be available till mid-November, somewhat _after_ the bikes are due in (my 9 is due late September). And like you said, I've not seen tires in the same size from any other manufacturers yet, so there will be a few weeks of trying to avoid anything that might cut the tire up bad!


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Fuzzwardo said:


> This is pretty much where I stand right now. The only downside would be dropping a large amount of money on a 2nd wheel set.


Exactly.

I'm trying to figure out what the contact patch size would be on the 27.5x4 compared to both the 26x4's and the 26x5's. I talked to Trek and they seemed to be of the opinion that if the terrain was mostly packed snow or even snowmobile tracks and the snow had set up at all (i.e. day old or so), the 27.5 would do well. It would also be fine on sand if it was less loose (i.e. near the water) and that it would be better in all cases than the 26x4's and slightly less floaty than the 26x5's. The tradeoff would be that it would be quicker in handling etc...

If so, that would work for me and should be a pretty safe bet. If not, then the downside is the extra set of rims and I'd be set up for summer and winter well. I had sort of planned on that eventually anyhow thinking that the 5" tires are the ticket for the winter, but I wanted to avoid the expense all at once. My LBS is trying to figure it out as well and may just let me take first crack at either a 7 or the 9.6 so I can figure it out. I'd much prefer it if the 9.6 would work just because of the serious upgrade on frame and components. If the 27.5" wheel is what they say it is, then it's a no-brainer.

J.


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

I have the 9 on order and mostly plan to use it on dirt,my feeling is it should be fantastic on dirt. Several of my friends have 2015 Farley's and all own several other bikes as well, it has become there go to bike now and seeing how much fun and how well fat tired bikes track and handle sold me on one. I would definitely build a set of 26 wheels for winter riding and just because!


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

I am looking at building up a nice steel monstercross bike (Soma Wolverine), but this thread popping up has me getting firm in the pants over the Farley 7 again. Crap.


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

techfersure said:


> I have the 9 on order and mostly plan to use it on dirt,my feeling is it should be fantastic on dirt.


Me too!

We don't get much snow round here so I'll probably take it somewhere that's had a good snowfall just to see how it goes, but it will be mostly on dirt in normal use unless we get a lot more snow than usual this winter (wouldn't mind if we do, actually!). Hoping the 27.5s will be really good for dirt use, but we'll see.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I'm thinking of ordering a set of Mulefut 27.5's for my 7 as an option for summer.
I should be able to run those Hodags just fine, along with the normal + options.
Yeah I think that's the sweet spot setup right there.
Not interested in those wide 27.5 rims.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

LBS had a Farley 5 (15.5) in stock. Appears to have a ton of rear wheel clearance with the 4.7" tire, might even fit the 2XL snowshoe. The front clearance will likely be limited by the fork brace. 

Wasn't a fan of the sliding axle assembly, it's similar to those used on older motocross bikes- threaded rods on each side. On the motorcycle side they were a pain to align especially once they got dirty, although on a fatbike you probably won't have to adjust them often. On the plus side you can fine tune for your tire clearance, but I would think you'd either want it all the way forward or back and a two position flipper mount would be simpler, lighter, with less to go wrong.

Barbegazi tires looked promising, and were reasonably wide. Looks to have more grip than a Jumbo Jim, but roll better than a GC or Bud/Lou.

It was pouring rain and the bike was two sizes too small so I didn't ask to ride it. My LBS said they were expecting Farley 7's next week.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I had the same thoughts about the Barbegazi tires just from the pictures I've seen/promising.


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

Looking for Farley 5 carbon fork ? Thoughts ? Think Trek will sell one aftermarket ?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

My thought is get the 7 - problem solved. You'll end up spending the same - more or less. Maybe a few hundred more than getting a carbon fork later.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Why not just go for the Farley 7 with the carbon fork and a few other upgrades. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

This is like the 15" wide or 16" wide snowmobile mountain track debate


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

solarplex said:


> This is like the 15" wide or 16" wide snowmobile mountain track debate


It is?


----------



## Metal8 (Aug 23, 2015)

Went to a local shop to order a 5 and they said "How would you like it tomorrow?" I'm a new member so thanks for all the info in this thread and the forum in general. It is an extremely helpful resource. Here are some pictures. I rode a sand dune area, crossed four beaches, gravel, pavement and some dirt single track for about 22 miles so far. I really like this bike. I had the tires at 8.5psi and everything felt pretty good.


----------



## Rob Schafer (Aug 23, 2015)

Stopped by my local LBS on Saturday. He has a demo 2016 Farley 5 demo. I'm going to pick it up this week and take out to the local single track for an evening. 

Also put money down on a Farley 7.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

Congrats Metal8. My Farley 5 should arrive sometime this week. Can't wait!


----------



## Metal8 (Aug 23, 2015)

moshock said:


> Congrats Metal8. My Farley 5 should arrive sometime this week. Can't wait!


Make sure your weekend is clear. This bike will cause major distraction.


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

Metal8 said:


> Went to a local shop to order a 5 and they said "How would you like it tomorrow?"


Looks good!

Still got a month to wait for my 9, so pictures of Farleys are all I have to look at right now! Usefully, yours just reminded me to find my big water bottle - it won't fit in the frame on my FS trail bike so I've been using a smaller bottle, but the big one should be no problem on the Farley. That's good, now I have a totally rational justification for having ordered the bike.


----------



## Robg68 (Oct 27, 2013)

METAL8---your new Farley looks nice!! I love the flat black and orange.


----------



## joboo (Mar 17, 2008)

Alright Trek heads 
Farley 5 or Surly Wednesday?? 
College age son wants to get Fat!! 

Peace, Joe


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Hard to wrong really. I'm guessing the Farley is a fair bit lighter.
Love the color of the Surly though...


----------



## tschram72 (Oct 21, 2012)

joboo said:


> Alright Trek heads
> Farley 5 or Surly Wednesday??
> College age son wants to get Fat!!
> 
> Peace, Joe


Would love to hear others thoughts on this also! I put a deposit on a Farley 7, but am really loving the Wednesday!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I have money on a 7 - no contest except for color.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Both will be good just have to choose steel or aluminum. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Rob Schafer (Aug 23, 2015)

I put money down last weekend on a 7. My LBS has a new 5 in that's a demo. Going to take it for a ride soon.


----------



## Sparky697 (Feb 10, 2015)

Farley will be more trail orientated. The Wednesday seems to be right in between a Pugs and an ICT.


----------



## tschram72 (Oct 21, 2012)

Sparky697 said:


> Farley will be more trail orientated. The Wednesday seems to be right in between a Pugs and an ICT.


I've been looking over the geometery quite a bit, they seem to be closely matched don't they? Or am I just ignorant to think that a 1/4" difference makes that huge of difference in the bb drop and chainstay and 3/4" in wheelbase? And the ht angles are the same. Trust me, I am no expert when it comes to this stuff, I am just looking at the numbers!

I was kind of thinking it was just a decision between steel vs aluminum? Yes, the Surly will be heavier, but only by a couple pounds maybe?


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

Got my Farley 5 last night, can't wait to take er for a spin today! Aesthetically, this bike looks incredible.


----------



## tschram72 (Oct 21, 2012)

Can't wait to hear your thoughts!


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Getting ready to build a Farley 7.....pics incoming 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Ugh... as if my wait wasn't going to be hard enough!


----------



## techfersure (Dec 17, 2010)

I have the 9 on order but might have the option for the 9.6 and actually is a better deal even though some of the components are a step down,but not significant for overall performance,the cost of the 9.6 and pick up a Bluto for not much more then the cost of the 9 and have a carbon frame and the carbon fork for winter use.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

And here we go, love the purple pics don't do it justice.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

Natedeezy said:


> And here we go, love the purple pics don't do it justice.


The purple looks pretty good to me even in the pics! Hard to say without seeing both in person, but I'd probably prefer the purple to the waterloo blue my 9 will be when it turns up. Not that I'm going to worry about how my bike looks, just how it rides.

Speaking of which, looking forward to hearing how _yours_ rides. :thumbsup:

And more pics if you get a chance.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I don't mind the blue, but I don't think green was a wise choice for the graphics.


----------



## tschram72 (Oct 21, 2012)

Holy crap! That thing looks bad a**! Is that the weight with reflectors and pedals? Pretty impressive either way!


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

Yes the blue and green does seem a bit of an odd combination. Might have to wear upside down foggles when I ride, or rose-tinted Oakleys...


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

That is without pedals, but it complete otherwise. 17.5" frame


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Can't wait for my 9.8 to come in....you know there will be pics....

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

Natedeezy said:


> Can't wait for my 9.8 to come in....you know there will be pics....


Ditto with my 9 when it gets here. Do you have a delivery date yet for the 9.8?


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Not sure, I've heard late September. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

Same here (UK), I've been told September 21st but that's an estimated date so I don't know whether they really have an exact day planned or it's just an educated guess. Presumably they should know by now what the shipping arrangements are to get the bikes into the UK, so I can only hope there's some sort of plan swinging into action!


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

I want my 9.8 so bad...time to order some R1 racing brakes to go with it!

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

Yes, I've already got a few things waiting to be fitted as soon as it gets here. And I expect the pile will grow over the next week or two! Sad isn't it?


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

Too be fair, it's not like the 9.8 really needs anything else. From current reviews and experience the Sram Guide brakes it comes with are supposed to be pretty solid. And the Race X lite stems are on par weight wise with the XXX lite carbon ones, just no where near as stiff and strong.

I am just a Formula brand whore. I love the powr and weight. And I am a tinkerer by nature, so the temperamental nature of their brakes is ok by me. 

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

The things I've got waiting aren't to replace anything, just additions like pedals and mudguards (so far...). I'm going to run with all the standard equipment at least to start with and see how things go before deciding whether to upgrade anything. I suspect it will mostly be fine for anything I want to do with the bike.


----------



## Grouch51 (Jan 14, 2015)

Anyone ridden both a 2106 Fatboy and 2016 Farley? I'm a total noob to fatbikes, but rode a Farley 5 in a parking lot and was annoyed at my left heel hitting either the chainstay or crank. Seemed like the crank width was huge. I'm having a hard time finding apples to apples data, but I think the Farley has 121mm bottom bracket width vs 100mm for the Fatboy. Am I reading these specs right? Ultimately, I'm wondering if the pedal-to-pedal width is narrower on the Fatboy?


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

I missed the early boat, my 9.8 is coming in November.. 

This will be the first bike in a long time that I don't think I will want to change anything on. The brakes are great, the drivetrain is great, the rest of the spec is excellent. Just have to remove the tubes and install my pedals. I might change the grips too...


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

@Grouch

The bb width doesn't tell the Q factor story. It's all about the crankset. Comparing apples to apples (ie. Race face Next cranks on both bikes) they will have the same Q factor. I used the 170mm spindle on my 2015 Fatboy and the Farley is setup for the same 170mm spindle. You could swap to the 190 spindle if you wanted more width.

I did find my calf would rub from time to time on the Fatboy seat stay. Will see what happens when I get my Farley.


----------



## Grouch51 (Jan 14, 2015)

It looks to me like the Farley 5 is already running a "190 spindle", based on the Race Face website showing 190mm for the Ride crankset with a max tire width of 5". Q factor = 222mm.

http://www.raceface.com/comp/pdf/FATBIKE-CRANK-CLEARANCES.pdf
Top line of the blue shaded area.

Does the Fatboy get away with narrower spindle and q factor from being 1x, whereas the Farley 5 is 2X? I can't find any data on the Stout XC Pro crankset.


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

Holy *%@& batman - just had an email to say that my Farley 9 has arrived at the store and they'll be contacting me about arranging collection in the next day or two! Quite a surprise given that the expected delivery date wasn't till 21st September. Not that I'm complaining, you understand. :ihih:

I heard they were supposed to be released at the start of September but I was assuming there would be shipping time to get to the UK after that, so I'm only hoping it isn't some sort of error where they've sent the email by mistake and the bike's not actually here yet. How frustrating would that be?
:yikes:

I'll know for sure soon enough. Anyway, must go as there were a few things I was going to order up so I'd have them before the bike arrived, but I wasn't rushing as I thought I had plenty of time...


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

Apparently the email was correct, just had the phone call and the bike's ready to collect so I'm out the door right now to go get it!
:thumbsup:


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

I am jealous. I haven't heard anything about mine yet. I guess I will just have to going riding to help stem the anxiety.


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

Looking for some answers from the folks that have picked up the new bikes

Trek lists chainstay length and that it has 15mm of adjustability, but doesn't state what position was measured for the geometry chart, anyone care to fill me in?

Which position was the bike set in for wheelbase length?

Also since they are talking about running reg 29er wheels with the adjustable dropout, does the 4.7 tire fit in the frame if the dropout is adjusted all the way forward or is it simply for some other smaller diameter tires?


----------



## [TA] (Dec 3, 2008)

The geo charts are based around having the sliders all the way forward (440mm cs) 4.7" tires fit just fine with the sliders in their shortest position. Most of the bikes I've seen have been shipping with the sliders in their longest setting, just remove the plastic spacer and adjust the stays to the length you desire. The plastic spacer is only there for CPSC and other regulatory reasons, it has no structural purpose.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

[TA] said:


> The geo charts are based around having the sliders all the way forward (440mm cs) 4.7" tires fit just fine with the sliders in their shortest position. Most of the bikes I've seen have been shipping with the sliders in their longest setting, just remove the plastic spacer and adjust the stays to the length you desire. The plastic spacer is only there for CPSC and other regulatory reasons, it has no structural purpose.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks for saving me some time 

can I pick you brain for one more thing?

I assume all trek geometry does not take into account suspension sag, that would explain the geometry differences between the farley 7 and 9?


----------



## Matterhorn (Feb 15, 2015)

Anyone tried slapping a set of 29+ wheels in their new Farley?


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

corsair77 said:


> Apparently the email was correct, just had the phone call and the bike's ready to collect so I'm out the door right now to go get it!
> :thumbsup:


Waiting to see some photos of the new bike!!!


----------



## [TA] (Dec 3, 2008)

TitanofChaos said:


> Thanks for saving me some time
> 
> can I pick you brain for one more thing?
> 
> I assume all trek geometry does not take into account suspension sag, that would explain the geometry differences between the farley 7 and 9?


Full disclosure, our geo charts are in serious need of an update. For the most part the charts take into account SAG. The geometry differences between the 7 and 9 are due to the difference in axle to crown of the rigid fork vs the Bluto. Our rigid fork has a 490mm axle to crown, the 100mm Bluto has a 521mm axle to crown. At 10% SAG the Bluto will be about 500mm AtC, which will make for small differences in geometry.


----------



## [TA] (Dec 3, 2008)

Matterhorn said:


> Anyone tried slapping a set of 29+ wheels in their new Farley?


29+ will fit the 2016 Farley just fine.


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

tadraper said:


> Waiting to see some photos of the new bike!!!


This will have to do for a start. By the time I got back it was getting dark so it's a flash photo and looks a bit washed out and the green bits came out looking an odd colour. Having seen it in person though, the blue has a really nice matt finish and I'm starting to like it! Just hope it still looks like that when it's been muddied and cleaned a few times...









I'll try to get some pictures in daylight when I get the chance.

I spent this evening fitting pedals etc, setting everything up and going tubeless (saved 727g total). I'll be trying to sneak away from work for a quick ride after lunch tomorrow, to see how she goes. Did do a quick circuit or three round the garden just to make sure everything works, and so far so good!
:thumbsup:

BTW, re the rear axle sliders, mine also came with the axle all the way back and the plastic spacers fitted.

And as discussed on another thread, in the time it took me to wheel the bike 10 yards from the sales desk out the front door of the bike shop, 4 different people asked me about it or said something along the lines of "nice bike". This was not happening to any of the other people wheeling bikes in and out of the store!


----------



## tschram72 (Oct 21, 2012)

The suspense is killing me on some ride reports! Oh, and a phone call to tell me mine has come in!


----------



## corsair77 (Aug 3, 2013)

tschram72 said:


> The suspense is killing me on some ride reports! Oh, and a phone call to tell me mine has come in!


Some people are so impatient! 

I managed to get away from work for a couple of hours, and did 12 miles with about half of it off road on local byways. There's still a few things to sort out, like a set of riser bars as I prefer to be a bit more upright, but it's now running tubeless and had the basic setup done for fork pressure etc.









This is my first fat bike, and also my first 1x11 (I'm used to 2x10) so I can't compare it with other fat bikes. At first it felt bouncy at the rear end when pedalling quickly, which is no doubt something I can alter with tyre pressures. In any case I soon found that it only happened when I was at the point where I'd be thinking about changing up a gear, so spinning quite quickly, and if I actually did change up it settled down right away to running much more smoothly. Once I started changing up a bit earlier and running a higher gear, I didn't notice it as a problem any more.

That actually turned out to be quite useful as one of my concerns was that the lowest gear is somewhat higher than on my 29er and I wasn't sure whether I'd be able to manage climbs ok, especially as I'm just getting going again after quite a long enforced break, but I was surprised to find that even now while I'm not at all fit I could take some of the hills in second where I'd normally be in first! Not quite sure how that works, but in general it actually seemed easier to pedal than my 29er, which I wasn't expecting. Either that or I've gotten much fitter while not exercising and putting on weight (which of course means I'm having to pull more up the hills than I was) - that seems unlikely...

To be fair, I've started off with tyre pressures that are too high (20psi) and I'm going to work my way down trying different pressures till I see what works for me (with kit I'm over 110kg so I don't think I'll be running at low psi for a while or the rims will get a bashing). Half of every ride will always be on the road to join the trails together, so it's going to be a compromise. I did drop the pressures to 17psi half way round and that definitely felt better on the trail sections with no real difference I could tell on the road, so I'll try going a bit further next time out.

Handling felt very good, though there wasn't anything really testing on the trails I had time to do. Did do one steep downhill on the road and got up to nearly 40mph, and it was completely stable which is good to know!

I set the fork pressure as per the RockShox guidelines, but it felt very stiff even with the compression damping on minimum. Is that a common thing with the Bluto? I'll check the sag properly when I get time as I'm sure it's not using anywhere near the full stroke at the moment so the pressure may need to come down a ways.

Would have helped if I'd thought to slide the rubber o-ring down the stanchion before I rode, so I'd know how much travel it actually _was_ using (hey, I was working on it till after midnight, give me a break!).
:bluefrown:

Overall, even with the few things that still need sorting out it was great fun to ride and despite the quite high tyre pressures it felt like it had more grip than my 29er and just rolled over everything in a very reassuring way. Remains to be seen what happens when it gets really muddy or I hit more challenging trails, but so far so good!

Even the stock saddle's reasonably comfortable - I was going to fit one of my WTB saddles, but I'll leave the stock one on now till I do a longer ride and see how it goes as it may actually be better than the WTB.

So all things considered, especially finding that it's much easier to pedal than I thought it might be after hearing some stories, I'm very happy!
:thumbsup:

BTW: Sorry, I can't help with the phone call about yours arriving.


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

Way too much air pressure. You should be in the 8-12 range. IF that

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

DukeNeverwinter said:


> Way too much air pressure. You should be in the 8-12 range. IF that
> 
> Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


I'm not sure I'd go as low as 8psi on a 27.5", especially in the rocks. These tires have close to an inch less sidewall than a 26" fat tire so less room for error.


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

Has anyone got their hands on a Farley 9.8 yet? I know it has all the bells and whistles but is it $2000 better than the 9.6. My LBS has a 9.8 coming in early next week and I need to make a decision quick to put my name on it if I want it.


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

I almost went 9.6 but for the parts upgrade is a good value. I felt a no brainer to go 9.8. Way better brakes, the best cranks, more carbon parts, full carbon fork,drivetrain upgrade and of course carbon wheels.

I suppose if you are going to change all the parts the 9.6 is the way to go.


----------



## kota12 (Dec 8, 2014)

Depends on your riding style. Main reason I ordered a 9.8 is the carbon rims, although I like other upgrades as well. If you like to hit corners hard, removing weight from the rims will lesson the gyroscopic effect and the bike will be easier to lean over at speed. It will also be easier to accelerate, this being most noticeable in taller gears. At lower speeds you will not notice the benefits nearly as much.


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

Never had carbon wheels or the carbon steerer. How will they hold up to a bigger guy? This would be my most expensive bike ever so I am a little nervous about pulling the trigger.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

crohnsy said:


> I almost went 9.6 but for the parts upgrade is a good value. I felt a no brainer to go 9.8. Way better brakes, the best cranks, more carbon parts, full carbon fork,drivetrain upgrade and of course carbon wheels.
> 
> I suppose if you are going to change all the parts the 9.6 is the way to go.


Yes. The carbon wheels alone are worth $1500+. You also get better cranks, drive train and brakes. I have the guide brakes on my bike and I love them. If you can afford it, go with the 9.8

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

Fuzzwardo said:


> Never had carbon wheels or the carbon steerer. How will they hold up to a bigger guy? This would be my most expensive bike ever so I am a little nervous about pulling the trigger.


They will be as durable or more durable than alloy. Being a bigger guy you will appreciate the additional wheel stiffness.


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

Well looks like you guys sold me on the 9.8. Hopefully by Wednesday next week I have a new badass bike.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

FWIW I think the 7 with a 29+ wheel set for summer, or when you're in the mood for that is the sweet spot. That's the route I'm taking. This way I can run 3.8" to 4.8" on the stock rims, then 29+ sometimes. Huge tire selection, Max versatility.

I think the 27.5 rims should have been 65mm to maximize the mass advantage. As it stands, I'm not going to bother with them since tire selection is also an issue.

For what I'm spending on upgrades I can easily get one of the 9's. I just keep coming back to the 7 FTW.


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

There may be lots of choice in the 26 fat but 27.5 fat will increase. I imagine(hope) Kenda and Maxxis will use interbike to release their 27.5x4 tires.

The Hodag was/is a quality tire at 26" so I think it will remain quality at 27.5. I'm confused as to why Bontrager didn't release their new tire models in 27.5.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Perhaps, but you're still left with an 80mm rim when narrower would be better.
See here's the 'problem' as I see it - and there really isn't a problem strictly speaking - these are nice bikes. What I see as the issue, or the less than ideal situation though is that Trek had an idea about making a faster wheel set, but they didn't take it far enough. They stopped short of taking their own logic to it's conclusion. They're attempting to straddle 2 different modes here in an effort to stay fat, but go faster.

What they should have done *IMHO* is gone with a 65mm, 27.5 wheel and a true to size 3.5" Hodag or Chuppie, or similar tire. THAT would make this whole 27.5 "fast" thing worthwhile. Or even a 65mm rim with the 4" Hodag tire - when as it stands it's simply a limitation the way I see it. Less than ideal tire profile (still fine, just not ideal) lower sidewall, wider rim than needed (heavier than need be) and not quite fat enough for softer snow conditions, but yet not as fast as it could be for dry conditions. Too much hedging bets here, and scored well, but missed the bullseye slightly with the 9's - again IMHO. I could ride one and be happy with it - still nice bikes, but the money shot for bang/buck and versatility is the 7 with a second wheel set. Or just leave it.

I'm waiting for Interbike, and if someone steps up with a nice but reasonable 65mm rim (think Mulefut) then that will be my second wheel set instead of the 29+. We'll see.

Also waiting to see what, if anything happens with fat suspension forks. I feel like I might screw myself if I pull the trigger on a Bluto right now, and still convinced I even want squish anyway.


----------



## kota12 (Dec 8, 2014)

I disagree with that. 80 mm rim will be faster in the winter on all but the hardest snow conditions and 29+ will be better in the summer in my opinion. And I hope the 27.5 is popular enough for others to release tires soon. Imagine a set of 27.5, 80 mm wide rims with a flowbeist and dunderbeist.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Not really the point, nor does it relate to what I typed... but no matter. I hope more tires come along in that category as well.


----------



## Matterhorn (Feb 15, 2015)

[TA] said:


> 29+ will fit the 2016 Farley just fine.


I thought so but when I email T-wreck directly I was told to look at the Stache and that 29+ would not fit the Farley. Odd.


----------



## [TA] (Dec 3, 2008)

They're probably thinking of the 2014-15 bike. 29+ will not fit the first GEN Farley. As the guy who designed both the Farley and Stache I assure you 29+ has gobs of room with the sliders all the way back and enough for dry conditions with them forward.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Matterhorn (Feb 15, 2015)

I believe you. Perhaps the customer service folks just made an error. 

Job well done on the Stache/Farley! Haven't looked at Trek (after riding for 30 years) since my 2011 Rig. I might be back on board. 

Keep it up TA.


----------



## Matterhorn (Feb 15, 2015)

Oh, and TA why no love for the tall folks? Likely not your call but I found the XL Stache to be too small. Short, low, and cramped. Maybe an XXL? The numbers seem similar to the Krampus but that frame feels better. Doesn't ride better though. 

Haven't had a chance to ride a 16' Farley. Will it feel bigger? More stack and reach might be nice. 

I'm 5'18" for reference.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

Has anyone seen a 9.6 in stores yet 

If not, do we have a date for when they should be arriving?

Also, is there a weight posted for the 9.6 anywhere?

Thanks


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Nope, nothing reliable, and nope.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

^


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

*couple pics of my 9.8*








with my 29 plus wheelset just to see if they would fit. They do.







Stock at 22lbs setup Single Speed.

It is a 17.5" and an absolute blast to ride. i have not ridden it in 29+ as i dont have the right width hubs..........yet. i'd guess it will be around 20lbs setup that way. as my plus wheelset is 3lbs lighter than the wampas with hodags.


----------



## mkdiehl (Dec 30, 2014)

22lbs......with pedals? Tubeless? Single speed....


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

What, how did you get yours! I preordered mine in May! I hate you, only because I am jealous.

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

Took my Farley 5 out for its first spin today. Did some off-road trails and a single track. Coming from a junker Target bike, I'm absolutely blown away by the quality. It's such a blast. Can't wait to go out on my next ride. What do you guys think about going tubeless?


----------



## krapper (Jan 4, 2015)

Nobody on this board would recommend going tubeless. 

Tubeless is cool. Does the 5 have the Mulefut rims? If so should be easy.


----------



## krapper (Jan 4, 2015)

OK. I got off my lazy *ss, and looked at the spec's for the 5. They do come with the Mulefut 80's. Good thread on tubeless set up: http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/my...xperience-mule-fut-maxxis-mammoth-948032.html

nuf said here.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

I had my LBS order the goods already to make it tubeless, but I haven't had the time to get it in the shop to have them do it yet. I'm a bit concerned with the maintenance I'm reading about with tubeless and temperature changes. Should I give it a try or stick with tubes? Anyone else going go tubeless?

Thanks for that link krapper. I read through it, but I'm not sold yet. I'm afraid of potential flats and temperature drops affecting the sealant. Thoughts?


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

Silver2ks4-

Have you ridden much dirt yet? What's your initial thoughts on the 27.5s and how they ride? Did you have a 26" fatbike before tis as well to compare them to?


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

mkdiehl said:


> 22lbs......with pedals? Tubeless? Single speed....


yes to all of the above.


Brock Photo said:


> Silver2ks4-
> 
> Have you ridden much dirt yet? What's your initial thoughts on the 27.5s and how they ride? Did you have a 26" fatbike before tis as well to compare them to?


they ride very well. Tons of cornering grip and very predictable with minimal self steer. my only other fatbike experience was a weekend with a geared beargrease on 26 x 3.8 knards. both bikes are equally fun and handle about the same. the knards seamed to roll a little better from what i remember.


----------



## dRjOn (Feb 18, 2004)

thanks. will be intereted in your thoughts on 29+ vs 27.5x4... im guessing the diameter of the wheels are within mm....kinda isolating the tyre effect. bike looks good!



silver2ks4 said:


> yes to all of the above.
> 
> they ride very well. Tons of cornering grip and very predictable with minimal self steer. my only other fatbike experience was a weekend with a geared beargrease on 26 x 3.8 knards. both bikes are equally fun and handle about the same. the knards seamed to roll a little better from what i remember.


----------



## Shiftracer (Dec 17, 2007)

moshock said:


> I had my LBS order the goods already to make it tubeless, but I haven't had the time to get it in the shop to have them do it yet. I'm a bit concerned with the maintenance I'm reading about with tubeless and temperature changes. Should I give it a try or stick with tubes? Anyone else going go tubeless?
> 
> Thanks for that link krapper. I read through it, but I'm not sold yet. I'm afraid of potential flats and temperature drops affecting the sealant. Thoughts?


Before you opt out of tubeless because of concerns about cold weather, check out this Bike Rumor link: Tire Pressure and the Cold: Bontrager?s PSI Conversion Chart Will Keep You Inflated This Winter


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

The difference is about .5" in diameter. comparing to my Gnarvester the Gnar is a rocket ship in straight line speed and flowy single track. the Farley handles tighter trails better and with the plus wheels only raising the bb .25" i think it is gonna be the better bike overall. plus its 4lbs lighter than the gnar now but the gnar does have an MRP stage on it. i cant wait to put some plus wheels on the Farley.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

dRjOn said:


> thanks. will be intereted in your thoughts on 29+ vs 27.5x4... im guessing the diameter of the wheels are within mm....kinda isolating the tyre effect. bike looks good!


29+ effectively keeps the outer diameter of the wheels the same - Chupies on 50mm Mulefuts are only 3mm larger/outer diameter. So things stay basically the same as the stock setup. Going with 27.5+ will lower the bottom bracket by a larger degree -still most likely not a problem, but measurably different than the stock setup.


----------



## tschram72 (Oct 21, 2012)

Hey all, I just called my LBS and asked them if they knew when my 7 was showing up. They came back with Nov 2nd! Anyone else have some better intel on this? This will be my first fatbike and I am super stoked to ride the crap out of this thing!


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

My LBS in regional Aus just notified me that my new Farley 5 has been built up. Dead keen to pick it up & go ride. Trips planned are a short one to catch the tail end of our highly variable snow season in the High Country, then a beach-biking cruise with the fam to South Aus's Limestone coast in November.
I see fat bikes as the legit evolution of the true all-terrain bike from a retro-grouch perspective, for back country exploring rather than racing and high-buck sponsored exposure such as racing and Red Bull events. 
With developments beyond the obvious tyre & rim technology, such as hydroformed alu frames, sealed bearings, hydraulic discs and dry type chain lubes rather than long travel & multi pivot full suspension, the fat bike keeps it real in the original spirit of just ridin' around.
Anyway, 'nuff cogitating: time to go and ride!!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

tschram72 said:


> Hey all, I just called my LBS and asked them if they knew when my 7 was showing up. They came back with Nov 2nd! Anyone else have some better intel on this? This will be my first fatbike and I am super stoked to ride the crap out of this thing!


Nah, I have a 7 coming too and have no idea when it will actually arrive, especially since a few 7's have already trickled in. The upside (or downside) is that it's going on layaway till March, so it really don't matter when it get's there.
Driving me nuts.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

Well, thanks to the info on this board and some good info on this thread I pulled the trigger and ordered my first fatbike today

Plopped down a big stack of $100 bills on a 2016 Trek Farley 9.6 and was told October 18th..... dam

Anyway... its not snowing yet and I dont really have a need for it till does. So hopefully winter waits for another month 


Side note....

Anyone with a Farley 7 interested in some 27.5 wheels in exchange for aome 26s? (Preferably in CA or Reno/tahoe)


----------



## Rob Schafer (Aug 23, 2015)

I'm torn. I've got $200 down on a Farley 7. The more I think I'd like the 9.6 carbon and weight savings. However I'd prefer the 26x5 tire/wheel combination the 7 offers for Michigan. Idk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I say pfftt! to the carbon frame. 7 is dialed.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Rob Schafer said:


> I'm torn. I've got $200 down on a Farley 7. The more I think I'd like the 9.6 carbon and weight savings. However I'd prefer the 26x5 tire/wheel combination the 7 offers for Michigan. Idk


Second set of hoops will cure all your ill's.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

Rob... 

I went through the exact same thing

I went 9.6 and figured I can trade the wheels if I need to be fatter


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

Just got the call I have been waiting for, the 9.8 is at the shop being assembled. Guess I will be making a trip in the morning. Getting excited.


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

Well shoot, I hate you also. 

But, I ordered a bluto. It's a race too see what gets here first. It, or the Farley. 

And, I have a dropper post waiting to go on also. I'll post up the weight of the bike in three forms. Stock out of the box. Stock, minus reflectors and set up tubeless, and then with bluto and reverb.

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

DukeNeverwinter said:


> Well shoot, I hate you also.
> 
> I felt the same way after all these guys were getting theirs. Really interested to see what you find with the weights.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Rob Schafer said:


> I'm torn. I've got $200 down on a Farley 7. The more I think I'd like the 9.6 carbon and weight savings. However I'd prefer the 26x5 tire/wheel combination the 7 offers for Michigan. Idk


This is exactly my quandary right now. Doing my research, I came to the conclusion than the 27.5x4 is going to be better than the 26x4 and that most of my riding is going to be groomed or hard packed snow and very little of fresh snow so the 26x5 is going to be marginally better. I'd rather have the lighter bike and the tires that are easier to spin up. Too, the extra set of wheels is the downside risk if I'm wrong and that would be fun to have anyhow.

The only issue for me is that there is not a studded 27.5x4 tire out so I'll have to stud the tires that come on the bike. Not a huge deal, but still not optimal.

Since I'm going to be riding this predominantly in the winter and on either a beach or snow trails, I don't need or want a suspension fork. The 9.6 is the bike that best fits my needs, I think plus it's nice to be able to go back to the 26x5 wheels/tires if need be. All in all, a pretty versatile set up.



litespeedaddict said:


> Second set of hoops will cure all your ill's.





Brock Photo said:


> Rob...
> 
> I went through the exact same thing
> 
> I went 9.6 and figured I can trade the wheels if I need to be fatter


Exactly right. An extra set of wheels solves the problem if you get it wrong. Then you still have a lighter bike and better components.

J.


----------



## bcriverjunky (Jul 8, 2014)

Rob Schafer said:


> I'm torn. I've got $200 down on a Farley 7. The more I think I'd like the 9.6 carbon and weight savings. However I'd prefer the 26x5 tire/wheel combination the 7 offers for Michigan. Idk


Go with the 26x5. I'm in MI with a Farley8. The 4" tires is fine for groomed but you will want to venture off into areas that aren't. Plenty of frozen water to explore and you will want some studded tires.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

bcriverjunky said:


> Go with the 26x5. I'm in MI with a Farley8. The 4" tires is fine for groomed but you will want to venture off into areas that aren't. Plenty of frozen water to explore and you will want some studded tires.


a 27.5x4 will have a larger contact area than a 26x4 and should be better in looser stuff.

Anyone know how much larger the contact patch is?

J.


----------



## bcriverjunky (Jul 8, 2014)

JohnJ80 said:


> a 27.5x4 will have a larger contact area than a 26x4 and should be better in looser stuff.
> 
> Anyone know how much larger the contact patch is?
> 
> J.


4" is 4" no matter how you measure it. If anything the 26 could equal more with the added squish. I ride mine all year so I'm happy with the 4" tire but I do wish I could run a 5" in the winter


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

When I picked my Farley up this morning I could believe the clearance it had in the rear with the 27.5x4. Not that I would buy another set of tires but how wide of a tire could be ran on the new Farleys.

Today was full of ups and downs. Pick the bike up this morning and rode it around the parking lot, then on the way home it was raining so hard I had to pull over so new bike got a good bath. By the time I got home, besides being super wet, had enough time to get dressed and head to work. Maybe tomorrow I will get to go for a spin.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

bcriverjunky said:


> 4" is 4" no matter how you measure it. If anything the 26 could equal more with the added squish. I ride mine all year so I'm happy with the 4" tire but I do wish I could run a 5" in the winter


The smaller side walls of the 27.5" tires are where they are also going to be limited in grip. What they gain with a slightly longer contact patch they will lose by not being able to run at low psi's as the rim will be more vulnerable to strikes. I ran as low as 3psi last winter when the snow was loose or deep on my 4.8" tires. Even if you could safely run that low of psi on the 27.5" tires they aren't going to have enough casing to spread very wide. I don't think that more contact patch is necessarily equal to more float as the longer 27.5" contact patch only adds to the front and back of the contact patch, but not the sides.

I really wish Trek would have given a 26" option on the carbon bikes. Would have given a bunch more tire options including studded, and made better use of the wider 197mm rear axle. I also wish they would have had a few color choices on the 9.6 as the current choice is a pretty girly scheme.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

Paochow said:


> The smaller side walls of the 27.5" tires are where they are also going to be limited in grip. What they gain with a slightly longer contact patch they will lose by not being able to run at low psi's as the rim will be more vulnerable to strikes. I ran as low as 3psi last winter when the snow was loose or deep on my 4.8" tires. Even if you could safely run that low of psi on the 27.5" tires they aren't going to have enough casing to spread very wide. I don't think that more contact patch is necessarily equal to more float as the longer 27.5" contact patch only adds to the front and back of the contact patch, but not the sides.
> 
> I really wish Trek would have given a 26" option on the carbon bikes. Would have given a bunch more tire options including studded, and made better use of the wider 197mm rear axle. I also wish they would have had a few color choices on the 9.6 as the current choice is a pretty girly scheme.


A girly scheme?!?!?!?!?!

Ya, I agree and wasn't thrilled about it, but it seemed like the best fit for my needs.

As for the larger patch thing. If the 27.5 was actually taller than the 26 then I could see them saying a "larger contact patch".... like they have on standard 27.5 vs 26 inch wheels. But since they are a very similar OD it is all hype and propaganda

I feel that they slacked out the head tube and made a new wheel size that will excel on dirt. I feel the new Farley is more of a XC bike that has some Fat bike qualities. This bike will dominate a standard fatty for the guys that are riding on dirt


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

JohnJ80 said:


> a 27.5x4 will have a larger contact area than a 26x4 and should be better in looser stuff.
> 
> Anyone know how much larger the contact patch is?
> 
> J.


Dude - whatever the tiny difference is - you would never know it.
The difference in feel will not be because of contact patch, but more likely sidewall height as someone else has pointed out.



> 4" is 4" no matter how you measure it.


A larger diameter wheel will have a slightly larger contact patch.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

bcriverjunky said:


> 4" is 4" no matter how you measure it. If anything the 26 could equal more with the added squish. I ride mine all year so I'm happy with the 4" tire but I do wish I could run a 5" in the winter


I have a 26x4 tire that measures closer to 3.5" on 65mm rims.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Brock Photo said:


> A girly scheme?!?!?!?!?!
> 
> Ya, I agree and wasn't thrilled about it, but it seemed like the best fit for my needs.
> 
> ...


The 9.6 looks to have a great frame and good components, but seriously the 27.5" wheels and pastel blue and green really turn me off. My daughter saw a pic of it on my tablet and said " Daddy you should get that bike it is sooo pretty". Umm no thanks.

Throw a Bluto on it though and it should be a nice trail bike. I think if I'm going to buy a "summer fatbike" though I'll get a full squish bucksaw.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

The blue and green is just wrong. 
Blue is fine, but it clashes with that green. Light blue and orange red looks particularly nice - like the Gulf Porsche color scheme.

There's a Superfly with those colors. Stick with what works. This is Design 101 stuff.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Rob Schafer said:


> I'm torn. I've got $200 down on a Farley 7. The more I think I'd like the 9.6 carbon and weight savings. However I'd prefer the 26x5 tire/wheel combination the 7 offers for Michigan. Idk





litespeedaddict said:


> Second set of hoops will cure all your ill's.





Brock Photo said:


> Rob...
> 
> I went through the exact same thing
> 
> I went 9.6 and figured I can trade the wheels if I need to be fatter





Gambit21 said:


> Dude - whatever the tiny difference is - you would never know it.
> The difference in feel will not be because of contact patch, but more likely sidewall height as someone else has pointed out.
> 
> A larger diameter wheel will have a slightly larger contact patch.


I would imagine that there is a benefit to the lower rotating weight. Would that not be true?

J.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

So, for the guys that have 27.5 bikes already....

Does it look like we can fit a 4.5 or 5.0 tire on the 27.5" wheel once they become available?

I would assume yes, but Trek says "will fit either 26x5 or 27.5x4"

You think that there would be room for a 5" tire on either wheel since they have the same overall diameter


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

A 27.5 x 5" tire, if true to size, will be huge, if such a thing ever comes to exist -which I wouldn't count on any time soon.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

Gambit21 said:


> A 27.5 x 5" tire, if true to size, will be huge, if such a thing ever comes to exist -which I wouldn't count on any time soon.


Why would it be any bugger than a 26x5?

They have the same OD, not seeing why the overall width would be any different


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I think you're a bit confused as to the rim size, tire size and OD relationships. (or I'm misunderstanding you)
Both the 27.5x4 and the 26x5 have almost identical outer diameters because the 4.7" tire on the smaller 26" wheel makes up the difference. Put a tire with that same profile in a 27.5 rim and I'm not sure it would fit.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

So the 3.8 (27.5) and the 4.8 (26) have a very similar width?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

No, similar (within 1-2mm) outer diameter.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

Ok... so we're on the same page there

I'm interested in getting a wider tire on the bike (once they become available)

Can someone with a 27 5 bike please post a photo showing how much room there is side to side, so we can see how much wider of a tire will fit. I'm guessing the 27 5x3.8 will be very narrow.

Also, how wide is te 27.5 tire on the OE wheels?


----------



## Angus (Jan 20, 2004)

went ahead and pulled the trigger on The 7, this will be my first foray in the fat bike world. It will be primarily used for snowy single-track. Unfortunately I missed the first batch but should have it around Thanksgiving.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Brock Photo said:


> Ok... so we're on the same page there
> 
> I'm interested in getting a wider tire on the bike (once they become available)
> 
> ...


After looking at a 9.8 today, I don't think the width will be the issue, but rather the height. To make the tire wider it will also have to get taller. The frame should fit a 5" (26") tire fine, but as Gambit21 is saying trying to make a 5" wide 27.5" tire will likely have too great of a sidewall height and therefore overall diameter to fit in the frame.

Here is a pic of a 29er, 29+ and 26" fatbike tires. Notice how much taller the 29+ is versus the 29er, despite both having the same rim diameter. Also not that the 29+ and 26" fatbike are very similar despite the fatbike having a smaller diameter rim, due to it's wider and larger diameter tire.








Here is a 4" fatbike tire compared to a 5+" fat tire, notice how much taller it gets for the added width:








Your hypothetical 27.5X5" fat tire would be bigger in diameter than the one pictured, hence I doubt it would fit in your frame.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

Paochow said:


> After looking at a 9.8 today, I don't think the width will be the issue, but rather the height. To make the tire wider it will also have to get taller. The frame should fit a 5" (26") tire fine, but as Gambit21 is saying trying to make a 5" wide 27.5" tire will likely have too great of a sidewall height and therefore overall diameter to fit in the frame.
> 
> Here is a pic of a 29er, 29+ and 26" fatbike tires. Notice how much taller the 29+ is versus the 29er, despite both having the same rim diameter. Also not that the 29+ and 26" fatbike are very similar despite the fatbike having a smaller diameter rim, due to it's wider and larger diameter tire.
> View attachment 1014842
> ...


Great explanation, thank you

I didn't realize that the 26x5 was taller and wider tan the 26x4, I thought it was just wider..... So I was thinking it would be a low pro 27.5x5 as well

On another note.... while I was at work today, I saw the Trek Demo rig pull in for our local Gran Fondo race tomorrow.... and they have a Farley 9.8 on board in my size

So... Demo ride tomorrow


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

Brock Photo said:


> Ok... so we're on the same page there
> 
> I'm interested in getting a wider tire on the bike (once they become available)
> 
> ...


Here are some quick pics I took tonight. As you can see, the 29+ is just a little taller so I am sure the Farley can go bigger, just not sure how much. The other pics show the clearance with the 27.5x3.8 stock tires.


----------



## Teton29er (Jul 31, 2011)

I'm also thinking about Farley with a second wheelset. Anyone know of any reason a clownshoe with lou wouldn't work with the Farley 7?


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

*Farley 9.8 Demo Ride*

Well, I have my 9.6 on order but have still yet to throw a leg over a Fat Bike and give it a spin.

Luckly, yesterday I got that chance. Trek Was in town and had a Farley 9.8 Demo with them and said I could take it out for a s long as I wanted. While I had work at 3PM, it still gave me plenty time to kick my own ass on this amazing bike



I live in Mammoth Lakes, CA and we have an amazing set of local trails as well as lots of lift assisted runs ranging from XC all the way to some of the craziest DH trails you could imagine. My plan was to put this bike through its paces and ride a good mix of runs.

I started off in town and made my way up a 1000 foot climb that was about 6 miles of twists and turns. The surface was small crushed rock, pumice, and some loose sand. The stock 27.5x3.8 tires worked great and gave me plenty of traction without being so heavy that pedaling was hard. I was thoroughly impressed by how efficient this bike was for such a huge tire



The only time I really noticed I was on something with a heavier wheel/tire combo was when I would take those first few pedal strokes and had to spin them up. While the Farley 9.8 had carbon wheels, it was still a bit more than the 27.5x2.4 I run on my enduro bike.

Once I reached Main Lodge, I continued up a trail called Beach Cruiser and continued to climb a few hundred feet more. This trail had a lot more twists and turns in it and took me to the backside of the Mountain near one of our almost empty lakes



After a quick photo op, I continued the climb and reached the top of the Beach Cruiser Trail. As I began to descend this smooth flowing single track trail I was rally impressed how smooth this rigid bike was. I began to hit some of the small features like root drops, small jumps, and rock gardens a little faster and couldn't believe how well the bike worked.



Then I got cocky... "Well, if its this good here... might as well take it to the top of the mountain and ride something a bit more challenging"

I headed up to Off the Top, an intermediate run that is full of lots of rock, roots, small drops, and all sorts of other fun things.

The first half I was having a blast and charging on the Farley 9.8, but then I got tired. I didn't want to stand and all these jolting braking bumps and rocks really kicked my ass. I got tired, and I got there fast. By the end of the run I was dead tired and regretting my decision.

While I wanted to pack it in, there was one more climb I had to make to reach the trail home. So, up I went.

This trail was very loose, had some big rocks, and some other things that usually give me trouble on my 27.5 Enduro bike. But with this beast I just kicked it into low and powered up and over everything without issue.



All in all, I was super impressed with this bike and am excited to receive my 9.6 next month.

The 27.5 wheels worked great as a dirt tire but I feel they will be lacking once the snow falls and I need a larger contact patch. More than likely these wheels will be going on the shelf when the snow falls and some 26's will help drain my wallet


----------



## Thrawn (Jan 15, 2009)

That' one hell of a demo!!!

Curious now... Anyne try and fit a 27.5 x 3.8 setup on a Farley 6 or 8?


----------



## TheFarleys (Sep 12, 2015)

After a lot of research, comparing, trying, tossing and turning pulled the trigger on Farley 9. Picking it up today. Hope I made the right choice. 

Has anyone tried any of the nines with a 26 x 5 tire setup? Thinking of getting 5" for the winter months.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

Well, I just ordered a set of the DT swiss BR 26" wheels for my 9.6 that I don't have. 

Im waiting to order tires until i see what others are able to fit in the new frame. 

Also, im just trying to read a lot to figure out what tires work best for snow as this will be my dedicated snow tire setup 

Anyone have a link to a snow tire shootout or something similar?


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Brock Photo said:


> Well, I just ordered a set of the DT swiss BR 26" wheels for my 9.6 that I don't have.
> 
> Im waiting to order tires until i see what others are able to fit in the new frame.
> 
> ...


Here is one I did one the Dillinger 5, Bud/Lou, and a bit on the Ground Controls: http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/bud-lou-versus-dillinger-5-a-938358.html

I bought a set of studded Snowshoe XL's so I'll be testing those out this winter as well.

I looked at a Farley 9.8 the other day and it should fit the 4.8" Bud/Lou and Snowshoe XL's without issue. Not sure on the Snowshoe 2XL though as that is a big mutha!


----------



## TheFarleys (Sep 12, 2015)

Took my new Farley 9 out for the first ride yesterday. I have to say that I really enjoyed the bike. The ride was a twenty mile spin on mixed terrain from tarmac to gravel to forest paths. The 27.5 Hodag tires worked out well on all the surfaces. I have to say that the tires were quite nice to ride even on tarmac. The tire pressure had been set up at the LBS and the tires were a bit on the hard side. The Bluto smoothed the front end nice, but rear tire was bouncing around quite a lot. I’ll start testing out different pressures today, but wondering what pressures are other Trek owners using on their Hodags?


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

TheFarleys said:


> Took my new Farley 9 out for the first ride yesterday. I have to say that I really enjoyed the bike. The ride was a twenty mile spin on mixed terrain from tarmac to gravel to forest paths. The 27.5 Hodag tires worked out well on all the surfaces. I have to say that the tires were quite nice to ride even on tarmac. The tire pressure had been set up at the LBS and the tires were a bit on the hard side. The Bluto smoothed the front end nice, but rear tire was bouncing around quite a lot. I'll start testing out different pressures today, but wondering what pressures are other Trek owners using on their Hodags?


I weigh 240 and rode a rigid

I ended up playing with pressure a lot on my demo and ended up 8F and 9R

I went as low as 6 front and liked it in loose dirt but took a couple rim shots. It was also really bound up on asphalt.

Hope that gets you in the balpark

PS... post some pics


----------



## FatSpooky (Dec 2, 2014)

TheFarleys...I'm curious about the weight of the 9. Any chance you have access to a scale? I'd also love to see a few more ride reviews as you work to find the sweet spot on your new 9.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

9.8 will be here tomorrow...woot!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## egrims (Aug 26, 2015)

Had to come out of the woodwork for this one. Just got word from my LBS that my Farley 5 will be here on Thursday. Already lining up some weekend rides. Can't wait!


----------



## TheFarleys (Sep 12, 2015)

Here's a quick iPhone snap from todays ride. Weather, trail and the bike were all really nice.


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

For those interested, a Farley 9.6 17.5 Stock, weighed 28 on our park scale. With reflectors. Converting to tubeless with about three scoops of sealant per tire. It weighed 26lbs and 12oz.


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

i got my farley 5 below 30 LBS with tubeless, carbon fork and 30T 1/10, stoked... the bike is a blast


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

deleted


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

aquamogal said:


> i got my farley 5 below 30 LBS with tubeless, carbon fork and 30T 1/10, stoked... the bike is a blast


Should have just bought a 7.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Ok wrong pic...here is a complete Farley 7 17.5










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

So, the 9.6 is only about 1 pound lighter than a 7? They have the same build except for the 9.6 has carbon frame and larger (should be a lighter combo) wheels

Seems a bit odd?

Especially when the 9.8 is around 22 pounds


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

The wheels on the 9.6 are still 80mm, and larger, so that's going to mitigate the weight difference somewhat. They'll still be lighter, just not as much as they could be had Trek gone with 65mm wheels - which they should have IMHO. One of the reasons I went with the 7.


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

The numbers still don't add up. Yes the wheels larger than a 26 so theres more wheel / spoke material. But the rubber saved between the tire and sidewall will save a decent amount 

Plus going to a carbon frame should be at least 1 pound minimum . 

Also odd that nobody has a 9.6 except this guy... yet he hasn't posted a picture except for the scale


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

Well, technically it isn't mine. But a coworkers. I assure you that it was a 9.6. Only thing not installed was dork disc and rear reflector. 

If the build between the 7 and 9.6 and there is a 1 pound difference in the frame. I call that pretty good weight loss. The price difference may suck, but I can't control that.

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

Shoot, and by that picture of the 7. It is a lost 2 lbs. 1lb 14oz is only 2oz from 2 lbs.

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

I guess we'll see as more people get them. I for one will be disappointed if my 9.8 isn't under the 25lb mark. Especially when 907 is showing a sub 19lb build. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

It should be about 22-23. Sans pedals!! The ONLY thing that is not weightweenie on the 9.8 are the brakes. Everything else is within grams of the lightest stuff on the market.

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

the 9.8 comes in at 23 pounds 11oz out of the box tubeless, size large


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

Natedeezy said:


> I guess we'll see as more people get them. I for one will be disappointed if my 9.8 isn't under the 25lb mark. Especially when 907 is showing a sub 19lb build.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Sub 19 for the same price? Got a link to that bike?


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

crohnsy said:


> Sub 19 for the same price? Got a link to that bike?


Doesn't sound quite right does it? I didn't think you could build one of these that light regardless of price, but I am always willing to be wrong.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

I know exactly zero specifics but I believe it's a belt drive SS.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

I would want to know more about that bike before I bought that hook line and sinker. Impressive for sure though, but I am not completely buying it. Any sealant in the tires? Any pedals or cages on it? Is it a stem you could actually use in Moab? Did they weigh 18 tires and use the 2 lightest ones? Are they using 17ga spokes? Any gears on it?

Impressive though, no doubt about that. Damn impressive.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

And I will need to ride it before I sign off on it!!


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

Natedeezy said:


> I know exactly zero specifics but I believe it's a belt drive SS.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


it can't be SS, there's 2 cables on the right side of the bars and a cable feeding into the right seatstay, it doesn't have a dropper post, what would the extra cable run if not a rear derailer?


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

I'm sure it's lighter than us mortals will be able to achieve. I'd like to think a fat bike that light would be pretty sketchy to ride hard be I could be wrong. I'd be most interested in frame/fork weight. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

litespeedaddict said:


> Doesn't sound quite right does it? I didn't think you could build one of these that light regardless of price, but I am always willing to be wrong.


No, sub 19 is easy now. I was more curious about the price because that's the biggest decider for weight.

It's easy to say such and such bike is 6 lbs lighter but if it's 2x the price then that claim is misleading. I think a $10k Farley would be easily sub 19lbs as well.

At $4800 I would think the Farley is on the better $/gram end of things but I don't know about the price of the others...


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

Natedeezy said:


> I'm sure it's lighter than us mortals will be able to achieve. I'd like to think a fat bike that light would be pretty sketchy to ride hard be I could be wrong. I'd be most interested in frame/fork weight.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The Whiteout is claimed at 1980g frame and fork, not sure the size and if that includes hardware.

The Farley 9.8 frame/fork/hardware is claimed 1900g for a 17.5"

The Wampa wheels are 2500g so there is a lot of potential for savings in the wheel department..


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

crohnsy said:


> No, sub 19 is easy now...


Pfff! If you throw enough money at it!


----------



## lvd (Sep 10, 2015)

Natedeezy said:


> Ok wrong pic...here is a complete Farley 7 17.5
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lets see more pics of the 7! Precious few non-rendering pics on the internet


----------



## lvd (Sep 10, 2015)

dp.


----------



## Apansson (Sep 17, 2015)

TitanofChaos said:


> the 9.8 comes in at 23 pounds 11oz out of the box tubeless, size large


Really? With the tubes removed? I heard the M size would be 10.4kg out the box, that's like 9.5 tubeless without pedals.. Dang, I was hoping for a sub 10kg build with pedals. Might be hard. Shipping in October to Europe, yawn.


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

Ride report for my new Farley 5. In a word: awesome! The framework really is well crafted, which doesn't jump out in photos and the dark grey/ orange color combo is fantastic. After a couple of minor position & cockpit setup tweaks and a degrease & dry lube of the chain last night, I had an hour or so around a singletrack sandpit near home today. The sand was taken with aplomb, it cornered basically as fast as I could pitch it at the sandy berms built up by local dirtbikers. No sinking or self-steer. The few short, rutted & rocky taken climbs were a revelation after years on a SS: traction aplenty, to the point where I was intentionally stopping just to see if I could move off again. I was expecting the front wheel to get a bit light but the stranglehold dropout at the rear was set to its rearmost position. Returning to discs was always going to be an upgrade but the clutched rear derailleur really helps in keeping chainslap to a minimum as well as the absence of dropped chains. The webbed chainstay bridge looks like it will become a bit of a mud trap but otherwise, I couldn't fault the frame or components. Nil issues with heel vs chainstay or seatstay.
The only thing I'll change in the short-term is to convert to tubeless, prob by the split moto tube & Stans method after drilling the rims for a schraeder valve.


----------



## egrims (Aug 26, 2015)

Fat Dan said:


> Ride report for my new Farley 5. In a word: awesome! The framework really is well crafted, which doesn't jump out in photos and the dark grey/ orange color combo is fantastic. After a couple of minor position & cockpit setup tweaks and a degrease & dry lube of the chain last night, I had an hour or so around a singletrack sandpit near home today. The sand was taken with aplomb, it cornered basically as fast as I could pitch it at the sandy berms built up by local dirtbikers. No sinking or self-steer. The few short, rutted & rocky taken climbs were a revelation after years on a SS: traction aplenty, to the point where I was intentionally stopping just to see if I could move off again. I was expecting the front wheel to get a bit light but the stranglehold dropout at the rear was set to its rearmost position. Returning to discs was always going to be an upgrade but the clutched rear derailleur really helps in keeping chainslap to a minimum as well as the absence of dropped chains. The webbed chainstay bridge looks like it will become a bit of a mud trap but otherwise, I couldn't fault the frame or components. Nil issues with heel vs chainstay or seatstay.
> The only thing I'll change in the short-term is to convert to tubeless, prob by the split moto tube & Stans method after drilling the rims for a schraeder valve.


I'm picking up my 5 today and this post could haven't gotten me more excited if it tried. That is awesome, so stoked to try mine out! Thanks for sharing!


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Apansson said:


> Really? With the tubes removed? I heard the M size would be 10.4kg out the box, that's like 9.5 tubeless without pedals.. Dang, I was hoping for a sub 10kg build with pedals. Might be hard. Shipping in October to Europe, yawn.


My LBS got one in and that's what they are saying - <24lbs tubeless. The guys there thought they could get it down another pound or so without a lot of work.

You know, that's pretty darn good. That's what a top end racing road bike used to go for back in the day.

J.


----------



## egrims (Aug 26, 2015)

Picked it up today. Can't wait to take it out for a proper rip. Just hit it around the parking lot. First impressions are this thing is amazing. I only wish I had gotten a fat sooner...


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

This thread needs more pictures of the 9 from the few who got the first small batch while I wait for mine to arrive


----------



## joboo (Mar 17, 2008)

Just got back from lbs..... checked out a customers 19.5 " 9.8..... 23# even...... without pedals. 
Damn nice ride..... didn't think of a picture..... because it wasn't mine..... but it has carbon everything impressive! 
Not sure about the carbon rims and my heavy butt, and the 27.5 wheel size... but seeing that rig in person has me thinking. 
Peace, Joe


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Not able to finish it but here is a large 9.8 out of the box, tubes, reflectors etc.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

I am picking up a 9.6 this evening, and I will have them weigh it and post some pictures. I am having them switch it to tubeless when they put it together.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Some build pics









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

Just picked up my 9.6. The shop weighed it without pedals and set it up tubless and it was 27 lbs


----------



## Brock Photo (Mar 23, 2008)

Awesome!

get some pics up and a ride report ASAP!


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

If there are specific things people want to see let me know. I will take it out either tomorrow afternoon or this weekend on some rocky, rooted and wet trails and see how it feels.

Colors look better in person than in the picture.


----------



## Apansson (Sep 17, 2015)

joboo said:


> Just got back from lbs..... checked out a customers 19.5 " 9.8..... 23# even...... without pedals.
> Damn nice ride..... didn't think of a picture..... because it wasn't mine..... but it has carbon everything impressive!
> Not sure about the carbon rims and my heavy butt, and the 27.5 wheel size... but seeing that rig in person has me thinking.
> Peace, Joe





Natedeezy said:


> Not able to finish it but here is a large 9.8 out of the box, tubes, reflectors etc.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So one guy says 23lbs, one guy says 23lbs 15oz with a photo. Hmmmm


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

I went for a ride this afternoon. The brakes seems a bit harsh, like the pads were rough and needed to seat in. I will give them a bit and see how it goes. I ended up carrying the bike for a bit on a steep trail, and it was nice having a smooth top tube with no cable runs under it. My other bikes are not this comfortable. As for the 1x11, I have not ridden with this before, on some of the fast downhills I would like liked another gear, but I definitely needed the lowest gear so overall it was fine and I am not going to change anything. Not sure what I think about the 27.5 wheels. I did not get to the snow, but got pretty close to it!


----------



## shoo (Nov 11, 2008)

Thanks for the ride report. I have a favor to ask. Could you get a measurement inside and outside the chain stays at the widest point. My wife has a 2014 Farley but it is too small and I would like to replace it. Trek states that they kept the same Q factor so I am curious what the 2016 Alloy frames measure.

Thanks!



Fat Dan said:


> Ride report for my new Farley 5. In a word: awesome! The framework really is well crafted, which doesn't jump out in photos and the dark grey/ orange color combo is fantastic. After a couple of minor position & cockpit setup tweaks and a degrease & dry lube of the chain last night, I had an hour or so around a singletrack sandpit near home today. The sand was taken with aplomb, it cornered basically as fast as I could pitch it at the sandy berms built up by local dirtbikers. No sinking or self-steer. The few short, rutted & rocky taken climbs were a revelation after years on a SS: traction aplenty, to the point where I was intentionally stopping just to see if I could move off again. I was expecting the front wheel to get a bit light but the stranglehold dropout at the rear was set to its rearmost position. Returning to discs was always going to be an upgrade but the clutched rear derailleur really helps in keeping chainslap to a minimum as well as the absence of dropped chains. The webbed chainstay bridge looks like it will become a bit of a mud trap but otherwise, I couldn't fault the frame or components. Nil issues with heel vs chainstay or seatstay.
> The only thing I'll change in the short-term is to convert to tubeless, prob by the split moto tube & Stans method after drilling the rims for a schraeder valve.


----------



## TheFarleys (Sep 12, 2015)

TitanofChaos said:


> This thread needs more pictures of the 9 from the few who got the first small batch while I wait for mine to arrive


Here's a couple from todays ride. I have to say the bike is starting to grow on me. Still looking for the optimal tire pressure, but really enjoy this bike. Coming from road and cyclocross bikes this is just plain fun and takes you anywhere.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Finally complete can't wait to get some miles in.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mkdiehl (Dec 30, 2014)

Tubeless? With pedals?
Details please. We don't know what that weight means without them


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Tubeless and no pedals 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Apansson (Sep 17, 2015)

Damn, seems my 22.04lbs with pedals will be hard to reach..!


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Apansson said:


> Damn, seems my 22.04lbs with pedals will be hard to reach..!


All it takes is money......


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

Apansson said:


> Damn, seems my 22.04lbs with pedals will be hard to reach..!


Nothing to it but to do it!


----------



## Apansson (Sep 17, 2015)

What do you reckon would be the easiest way(s) then to drop roughly 2lbs? I'm thinking of DMR vault super light mg/ti pedals, 290 grams. But yeah? Losing 1kg or so seems difficult...


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Apansson said:


> What do you reckon would be the easiest way(s) then to drop roughly 2lbs? I'm thinking of DMR vault super light mg/ti pedals, 290 grams. But yeah? Losing 1kg or so seems difficult...


It will be difficult as the 9.8 already has a lot of lightweight parts. Every gram will count. You best bet would be to do a spreadsheet of all the weights of the factory parts and their lighter alternatives. At that point you would likely be better just buying the frame set and building it up. I saw that the factory wheels appear to be pretty heavy for a carbon set (2500gr)- swapping to 26" carbon hoops and Jumbo Jim tires would help lose some significant mass.

For pedals: Xpedo Spry are 260gr so lighter yet.


----------



## Apansson (Sep 17, 2015)

Paochow said:


> It will be difficult as the 9.8 already has a lot of lightweight parts. Every gram will count. You best bet would be to do a spreadsheet of all the weights of the factory parts and their lighter alternatives. At that point you would likely be better just buying the frame set and building it up. I saw that the factory wheels appear to be pretty heavy for a carbon set (2500gr)- swapping to 26" carbon hoops and Jumbo Jim tires would help lose some significant mass.
> 
> For pedals: Xpedo Spry are 260gr so lighter yet.


Thing is I work in the business so I get a sick price on the bike, and I really don't wanna make a build of my own for that reason. 10kg was just a dream, but I suppose it'll be hard, and it's mostly for show off anyway and I doubt a 11kg farley won't feel much different than a 10kg one. I mean, it's probably possible to build a 10kg bike, but I enjoy having stock stuff too in case of screwup and in the case of resale and swapping bike each year.

Thanks for the pedal tip, a lot cheaper too than the ones I picked out, I wonder if there's a notable difference in quality though.


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

Paochow said:


> It will be difficult as the 9.8 already has a lot of lightweight parts. Every gram will count. You best bet would be to do a spreadsheet of all the weights of the factory parts and their lighter alternatives. At that point you would likely be better just buying the frame set and building it up. I saw that the factory wheels appear to be pretty heavy for a carbon set (2500gr)- swapping to 26" carbon hoops and Jumbo Jim tires would help lose some significant mass.
> 
> For pedals: Xpedo Spry are 260gr so lighter yet.


I have a 9.6 and am thinking about getting a second set of rims (26", carbon) with 5" tires for winter riding. Any suggestions on what rims are light strong and cheap (I know the three don't go together).


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

I thought I posted this the other day, but I don't see it. Apologies if it is a duplicate. I did a ride up the hill and got close to the snow but not in it.



The bike worked well, There is a section of the trail where I have to carry it, and it was comfortable. Other bikes run cables under the top tube and make it painful to put on my shoulder, but not this bike. My one complaint is the brakes seem pretty noisy and grab a lot, kind if like the pad is really coarse. Is this normal, and will they quiet down when they bed in?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

jrogersAK said:


> I have a 9.6 and am thinking about getting a second set of rims (26", carbon) with 5" tires for winter riding. Any suggestions on what rims are light strong and cheap (I know the three don't go together).


Answered your own question I think 
Go Chinese Ebay and roll the dice.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

The DT Swiss BR 2250 is another option- it is as light as many carbon sets, strong, and cheaper, especially from the euro sites.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

egrims said:


> Picked it up today. Can't wait to take it out for a proper rip. Just hit it around the parking lot. First impressions are this thing is amazing. I only wish I had gotten a fat sooner...
> 
> View attachment 1016147


Nice pic, thanks for sharing! I have the Farley 5 as well. Impresses me every time I look at it. The paint job is just sexy, ain't it?!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Apansson said:


> What do you reckon would be the easiest way(s) then to drop roughly 2lbs? I'm thinking of DMR vault super light mg/ti pedals, 290 grams. But yeah? Losing 1kg or so seems difficult...


I sense much weenie in you young one.

23lbs is pretty F'ing light.


----------



## TheFarleys (Sep 12, 2015)

Does anyone know when the Bontrager Haru Pro carbon fork will be sold separately? Any idea on the price?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

TheFarleys said:


> Does anyone know when the Bontrager Haru Pro carbon fork will be sold separately? Any idea on the price?


It may never be sold separately.


----------



## Apansson (Sep 17, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> I sense much weenie in you young one.
> 
> 23lbs is pretty F'ing light.


Course it is! But being in the business does that to you


----------



## TheFarleys (Sep 12, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> It may never be sold separately.


Say it ain't so!


----------



## egrims (Aug 26, 2015)

moshock said:


> Nice pic, thanks for sharing! I have the Farley 5 as well. Impresses me every time I look at it. The paint job is just sexy, ain't it?!


Very! I'm very impressed with the look. The ride is amazing too. Got a chance to hit some trail this weekend. Was after 20 miles on the road so need to get on it with some fresh legs to get a proper run through. But man is it fun.


----------



## FatSpooky (Dec 2, 2014)

TheFarleys said:


> Say it ain't so!


This UK site is showing some info

Bontrager Haru 26" Carbon Fat Bike Fork | Triton Cycles


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

FatSpooky said:


> This UK site is showing some info


That's good news


----------



## TheFarleys (Sep 12, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> That's good news


The price seems decent too. Hope that information is correct.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Apansson said:


> Course it is! But being in the business does that to you


Aye - been there.
Although back then while at the shop, same as now I usually shook it off before pulling the trigger and tried to stay sensible. Making $8.00 an hour as a bike mechanic helped keep my spending in line too.


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

Sure, here you go:
CS width at widest point (ie. near your heels) is 164 mm
CS outer width at rear hub (excluding axle QR) is 233 mm
Q factor (centre of frame to outermost crank face at pedals) is 114mm (ie 228mm total bilaterally).
The chainstays themselves are remarkably thin (surely solid?), but "high" when viewed side-on, for most of their length and run parallel for most of their length from the widest point at the rear tyre to about where the rear sprocket cluster starts, if that makes sense.

The frame is very well manufactured, with a lot of subtle shaping due to hydroformed construction, which isn't evident in even the enlarged images on Trek's website. I'd recommend you check it out closely in person if you can. It's very impressive next to my old school TIG welded steel HT (which is still pretty cool).



shoo said:


> Thanks for the ride report. I have a favor to ask. Could you get a measurement inside and outside the chain stays at the widest point. My wife has a 2014 Farley but it is too small and I would like to replace it. Trek states that they kept the same Q factor so I am curious what the 2016 Alloy frames measure.
> 
> Thanks!


----------



## shoo (Nov 11, 2008)

Hey thanks a bunch Fat Dan. I apreciate you taking the time to get those measurements.

Cheers.



Fat Dan said:


> Sure, here you go:
> CS width at widest point (ie. near your heels) is 164 mm
> CS outer witdh at rear hub (excluding axle QR) is 233 mm
> Q factor (centre of frame to outermost crank face at pedals) is 114mm (ie 228mm total bilaterally).
> ...


----------



## NDTransplant (Feb 6, 2012)

TheFarleys said:


> Here's a couple from todays ride. I have to say the bike is starting to grow on me. Still looking for the optimal tire pressure, but really enjoy this bike. Coming from road and cyclocross bikes this is just plain fun and takes you anywhere.
> 
> View attachment 1016547
> View attachment 1016548


Would you know what your 9 weighs?


----------



## TheFarleys (Sep 12, 2015)

NDTransplant said:


> Would you know what your 9 weighs?


Sorry but I don't have a scale. Would be interesting to know though. Is there anyone else out there who would have both a 9 and a scale?


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

bcriverjunky said:


> 4" is 4" no matter how you measure it. If anything the 26 could equal more with the added squish. I ride mine all year so I'm happy with the 4" tire but I do wish I could run a 5" in the winter


The larger diameter will make the tire contact patch longer. Yea the same width but larger area for sure.


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

Paochow said:


> The DT Swiss BR 2250 is another option- it is as light as many carbon sets, strong, and cheaper, especially from the euro sites.


Thanks for pointing me to those rims.

When I look at them, it says tubeless setup is 'in development' Does anyone know what that means? It seems like it would be silly to get light rims like this and then add tubes. If not, please explain.

Can someone explain what rim width and setup I would need to run 5" fat tires on a Farley 9.6" I see things talking about everywhere from 100mm to 65mm. It seems like the same time would not fit well on that great of a range. Any help and explanation is appreciated.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

jrogersAK said:


> Thanks for pointing me to those rims.
> 
> When I look at them, it says tubeless setup is 'in development' Does anyone know what that means? It seems like it would be silly to get light rims like this and then add tubes. If not, please explain.
> 
> Can someone explain what rim width and setup I would need to run 5" fat tires on a Farley 9.6" I see things talking about everywhere from 100mm to 65mm. It seems like the same time would not fit well on that great of a range. Any help and explanation is appreciated.


From what I've read, DT Swiss isn't going to release the tubeless kit. As silly as it sounds, shrink wrap tubeless is a cheap, reliable, lightweight solution. My neighbor and I have been running it all summer without issue on the very similar Fatboy rims.

As for wheel size, I'd go with a 80-100mm rim to get a wide contact patch with the larger tires. Wider is usually better, however be mindful of weight increases. Going from a DT Swiss BR rim (81mm) to a Clownshoe (100mm) is an increase of 250gr per wheel.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

solarplex said:


> The larger diameter will make the tire contact patch longer. Yea the same width but larger area for sure.


Well I rode a 9.8 this weekend. Really liked the bike. I took it on a sand beach and it motored right around on the sand including going up inclines. It had rained over the night before, the sand was dry with a very slight crust on it and loose underneath. It sure wasn't compacted at all (this is a public beach with a lot of traffic).

So I'm pretty convinced that the 27.5x4 will work just fine for me in most cases. Tire inflation was on the high side (~10psi) but no issues. Had I reduced tire pressure a bit, I'm sure that would have made it even better. This will be my first fat bike but I'm still impressed with the flotation of the 27.5x4 on this sand. I'll be riding mine mostly on snowing trails and I'll probably put GripStuds in the tires since there isn't a pre-studded option for the 27.5's yet.

J.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Well it looks like there is plenty of clearance, decided to put my Bud and Lou on Clowns on. 









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Natedeezy said:


> Well it looks like there is plenty of clearance, decided to put my Bud and Lou on Clowns on.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


See that is how it should have come from the factory! A kick ass snow bike!


----------



## cardnation (Jul 2, 2014)

So has anyone been able to measure and weigh the Bontrager Barbegazi 26x4.7" tires yet?


----------



## Apansson (Sep 17, 2015)

Natedeezy said:


> Well it looks like there is plenty of clearance, decided to put my Bud and Lou on Clowns on.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Whats the weight and price of these rims? Are they significantly heavier than the wampas?


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

I would wager that the clownshoe wheelset has about 500g-800g on top of the Wampas if not more

Some quick estimates
1000g per rim
650g for hubs
380g for spokes
150g rim strips


----------



## Apansson (Sep 17, 2015)

crohnsy said:


> I would wager that the clownshoe wheelset has about 500g-800g on top of the Wampas if not more
> 
> Some quick estimates
> 1000g per rim
> ...


Ah cool. Nothing for me then! I'm just going for as light as possible. Did you tubeless the wampas+hodags? Do you need anything else apart from sealant?


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

He clowns are much heavier than the stock wheels even built with I9s and light spokes. Defiantly will be winter only wheels. I think this was the back wheel after it was built.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

Farley 9's are pushed back to late november now, but some shop in california over ordered on the first wave sending one in my size back into stock

It's on it's way to WI should be riding it by next weekend, I'm pumped


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Apansson said:


> Ah cool. Nothing for me then! I'm just going for as light as possible. Did you tubeless the wampas+hodags? Do you need anything else apart from sealant?


DT Swiss Big Ride would be a good lightweight somewhat affordable option. They are ~300gr lighter than the Wampas


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Paochow said:


> DT Swiss Big Ride would be a good lightweight somewhat affordable option. They are ~300gr lighter than the Wampas


That means the Wampas are in the same neighborhood as the Mulefuts...confirming my suspicions that an 80mm 27.5 rim is less than ideal.

I keep bouncing back and forth between those DT Swiss rims and switching to 4" tires in summer, or 29+ (which I will use plenty Hank)
29+ makes the most sense since I can still run 4" tires on the Mulefuts. Those damn DT Swiss rims just won't leave me alone though.

I think a set of Next SL cranks are a better bang for the buck weight loss option though. Still...


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

Paochow said:


> DT Swiss Big Ride would be a good lightweight somewhat affordable option. They are ~300gr lighter than the Wampas


I don't have the numbers here but considering overall diameter the wampa wheelset is realistically lighter than the other equivalent options that keep the same wheel O.D. as the 27.5x4 tire will be lighter than the other tires available which are all 5" to achieve the same O.D.

If maintaining the geometry doesn't matter to you or you're just being a weight weenie the thing then carry on, the farley BB height is only like 5mm lower than say a 907 carbon so if you're enjoying the current diameter, it likely does not matter anyways


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

TitanofChaos said:


> I don't have the numbers here but considering overall diameter the wampa wheelset is realistically lighter than the other equivalent options that keep the same wheel O.D. as the 27.5x4 tire will be lighter than the other tires available which are all 5" to achieve the same O.D.
> 
> If maintaining the geometry doesn't matter to you or you're just being a weight weenie the thing then carry on, the farley BB height is only like 5mm lower than say a 907 carbon so if you're enjoying the current diameter, it likely does not matter anyways


It will really depend on the weight of the 27.5" tires. If you save 150gr a wheel over the Wampas, and run JJ 4.8 LS, the Wampas would need to be less than 1050 gr to net any weight savings.


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

Without riding and or touching the Wampas, I can imagine they are going to be way more durable than the DT fat rims. For snow riding the dt may be better? But, for dirt, the wampas should be a better choice.

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

DukeNeverwinter said:


> Without riding and or touching the Wampas, I can imagine they are going to be way more durable than the DT fat rims. For snow riding the dt may be better? But, for dirt, the wampas should be a better choice.
> 
> Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


Objection your honor, the defense is speculating...

Granted this is all speculation until the Wampas get some dirt miles, but I'd have a hard time believing your statement about durability. The DT rim is a similar design to the Fatboy SL rim, which despite the wheels having hub issues, the rims themselves have proven strong and reliable. Carbon is very strong and stiff, but doesn't tend to do as well with sharp impacts. Do a google image search for "carbon rim failure" and take a look at the carnage. Combine that with the shorter sidewalls of the 27.5" tires and you are inviting rim strikes when you run low psi.

If you don't believe me, when you get your 9.8 we can both set our tires to 6 psi and ride through rocks gardens and see who's wheels break first


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

Lol, 6psi won't hold up under my 240lbs fat ass, regardless of rims. 

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

dukeneverwinter said:


> lol, 6psi won't hold up under my 240lbs fat ass, regardless of rims.
> 
> Sent from my 831c using tapatalk


lol


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

DukeNeverwinter said:


> Without riding and or touching the Wampas, I can imagine they are going to be way more durable than the DT fat rims. For snow riding the dt may be better? But, for dirt, the wampas should be a better choice.


...not so much.


----------



## jcrab66 (Aug 17, 2015)

got the call a little while ago, my Farley 5 has arrived and is built, gonna pick it up tomorrow, so stoked!


----------



## jcrab66 (Aug 17, 2015)

egrims said:


> Picked it up today. Can't wait to take it out for a proper rip. Just hit it around the parking lot. First impressions are this thing is amazing. I only wish I had gotten a fat sooner...
> 
> View attachment 1016147


14 hours until I pick mine up, not sure I'm gonna sleep tonight!


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

What would the recommended PSI be for my Farley 5 tires?

I'm running tubeless and weigh 220lbs.

Not finding much in the line of calculators or graphs online, and I'm sure it's pretty tire-specific based on height, width, weight of rider, and maybe tubes or tubeless...


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

There's no bike specific pressures first of all. Secondly you'll have to experiment to see what works for you in various conditions. Start at 9 or 10 psi and go from there.


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Any other follow TrekU Ninjas on here?

I'm still desperately waiting for my 7 to come in!! All my fellow employees are getting their 5's and 9.8's in stock. I just want my 7! Anyone else get theirs yet?

My plans for my build are: tubless, 70mm Pro stem, carbon bar, carbon post, carbon saddle.

I'd be stoked if I can get it to end up at 27lbs.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

ZenkiS14 said:


> Any other follow TrekU Ninjas on here?
> 
> I'm still desperately waiting for my 7 to come in!! All my fellow employees are getting their 5's and 9.8's in stock. I just want my 7! Anyone else get theirs yet?
> 
> ...


Best wishes on that. The 9.6's are coming in at 27.5-28 with pedals and tubeless. I've put jackelope wheels w/hodags tubeless, Easton EA 70 carbon bars, 1 X 10, Kent EriksonTitanium seat post, lighter Fabric seat and a Salsa Makwa carbon fork on my Farley 6 and it's just at 27.9.


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

I just want my 7! Will add bluto and probably a reverb. Will go tubeless as well. Really looking fwd to it


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Ivar Elverum said:


> I just want my 7! Will add bluto and probably a reverb. Will go tubeless as well. Really looking fwd to it


Curios as to why you just didn't go for the 9?


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

Considered the 9, however, I want 26*4.7 tires, and even if i add bluto and reverb, still haven't reached the 9-price.. 
Had to stop somewhere.. 

I do hope that the barbegazi tires are good for snow..


----------



## David Cooney (Dec 26, 2013)

*Sizing ( Farleys run small ?)*

Guys whats the story with the sizing for these farleys.......A few chaps have mentioned they run small ?

Im 5' 7" ? Obviously its going to be either a 15.5 or a 17.5.

Has anyone made that choice already ?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

ZenkiS14 said:


> Any other follow TrekU Ninjas on here?
> 
> I'm still desperately waiting for my 7 to come in!! All my fellow employees are getting their 5's and 9.8's in stock. I just want my 7! Anyone else get theirs yet?
> 
> ...


Wasting money until you get rid off the low hanging fruit/weight in the cranks. A set of Next SL cranks will save you .9lbs


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Ivar Elverum said:


> Considered the 9, however, I want 26*4.7 tires, and even if i add bluto and reverb, still haven't reached the 9-price..
> Had to stop somewhere..
> 
> I do hope that the barbegazi tires are good for snow..


They were decent in sand when I road a 9.8 (that I am in the process of buying) with them the other day on a beach. I followed that up with a Pivot Les Fat with 26x4's on it and the 27.5x4's were much better than the 26x4's. More float for sure. I'm going to mount GripStuds in them for the winter. I think they will be better than the 26x4's, more than half way to the float of the 26x4.7's and will roll better in general on everything other than loose deep new snow. Groomers - no doubt.

J.


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Gambit21 said:


> Wasting money until you get rid off the low hanging fruit/weight in the cranks. A set of Next SL cranks will save you .9lbs


That's a good point, I'd probably go X01 over Next though. I'm a SRAM guy at heart. Or I may not play with it at all past the cockpit, get it feeling like I want in the cockpit, and just leave it. It wont be my main bike at all. I'll be doing bars/stem for preference, and carbon post for comfort.


----------



## scubaklook (Apr 20, 2005)

David Cooney said:


> Guys whats the story with the sizing for these farleys.......A few chaps have mentioned they run small ?
> 
> Im 5' 7" ? Obviously its going to be either a 15.5 or a 17.5.
> 
> Has anyone made that choice already ?


 I am 5'6" and went to a demo this weekend. The 15.5 was too small for me. I was over max on seatpost and it was cramped. It may work for you if you have short legs and arms or short legs and want to be very upright. The 17.5 felt very comfortable to me.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Any new Farley 5 owners here in UK? If so did you get from Evans and how were the delivery times? Looking at it for my first Fatty. I would normally never have looked at Trek bikes but thought these 2016 models were pretty forward thinking and decent price for spec. Interested in owners views. thanks


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Natedeezy said:


> Curios as to why you just didn't go for the 9?


I couldn't live with the ugly green on blue - it's just wrong.


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

JohnJ80 said:


> They were decent in sand when I road a 9.8 (that I am in the process of buying) with them the other day on a beach. I followed that up with a Pivot Les Fat with 26x4's on it and the 27.5x4's were much better than the 26x4's. More float for sure. I'm going to mount GripStuds in them for the winter. I think they will be better than the 26x4's, more than half way to the float of the 26x4.7's and will roll better in general on everything other than loose deep new snow. Groomers - no doubt.
> 
> J.


It's the groomer look and effect I want. 
In the end it was a question about how much, and the stomach feeling. I did land on the 7 and we can go back and forth a million times if I should've decided on the other one... 
In the future my fs may have 27,5+ (probably) and my fatbike will have 26*6?


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Gambit21 said:


> I couldn't live with the ugly green on blue - it's just wrong.


I think it's one of their better color combo's!!


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Ivar Elverum said:


> It's the groomer look and effect I want.
> In the end it was a question about how much, and the stomach feeling. I did land on the 7 and we can go back and forth a million times if I should've decided on the other one...
> In the future my fs may have 27,5+ (probably) and my fatbike will have 26*6?


Either way, with the trek 2016 fat bikes, the downside risk is another set of rims and tires. With other bikes that are not set up the same way, it's worse because the downside risk is to have to get a different bike. Also, I'm going to have to stud the tires myself since there are not any 27.5x4 studded tires yet. Not a big deal, but one more thing to do.

In my case, and for where I'm going to ride, I was pretty sure that the 27.5x4 would work after talking to the factory and looking into it with my LBS but I wasn't sure. When I got to ride it, and then compare it to a 26x4, then it was clear. But, I think, it's an individual decision and I think preferences are all over the map on it. What i can say was that I was really impressed with the bike and it's handling.

J.


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

About size, I'm 181cm and i ordered 19,5"

edit: yeah, keep my 7 next year just upgrade with a new wheel set


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

litespeedaddict said:


> I think it's one of their better color combo's!!


Blech!!


----------



## Jmf003 (Nov 23, 2011)

moshock said:


> What would the recommended PSI be for my Farley 5 tires?
> 
> I'm running tubeless and weigh 220lbs.
> 
> Not finding much in the line of calculators or graphs online, and I'm sure it's pretty tire-specific based on height, width, weight of rider, and maybe tubes or tubeless...


235 lbs here. Last winter I ran my tubeless Dillinger 5s at 4-5 PSI on soft , deep snow increasing to 8-10 PSI on hard pack.


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

Thrawn said:


> That' one hell of a demo!!!
> 
> Curious now... Anyne try and fit a 27.5 x 3.8 setup on a Farley 6 or 8?


I have a set of 27.5 Scrappers with Panaracers 3.5 and there is plenty of room and are they are a blast to ride.

Btw both my bikes are 14 Farley

Marty-mj
www.garagescene.net www.syborgtwinturbo.com www.2ndcamaro.com


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

Natedeezy said:


> I guess we'll see as more people get them. I for one will be disappointed if my 9.8 isn't under the 25lb mark. Especially when 907 is showing a sub 19lb build.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk





















It's possible to get the bike sub 23 with a carbon fork if you buy all the right parts but it's expensive. I'm considering a carbon frame however I'm pretty hard on my bikes.



















Marty-mj
www.garagescene.net www.syborgtwinturbo.com www.2ndcamaro.com


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Mine came in at 24lb 2oz sans pedals. Shire would have been nice to see 23 but I honk I'll survive lol....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Natedeezy said:


> Mine came in at 24lb 2oz sans pedals. Shire would have been nice to see 23 but I honk I'll survive lol....


Honking in the Shire - sounds like good times!


----------



## bswedorski (Aug 20, 2015)

Picked up a Farley 9.8 last week. Absolutely love it. It's my first Fat Bike althought I've demoed a few.

I did manage to generate a slow leak in the front tire after the first ride. Due to there being ZERO replacement tubes in stock anywhere, it is now set up tubeless front and back.

Still waiting on my xpedo spry pedals (tomorrow). Currently it weighs in at 24lb10oz for a 17.5 frame.

https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot...0_10204989969688843_5655158797123263021_o.jpg


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

24lb10oz is tubeless?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bswedorski (Aug 20, 2015)

That was the weight after the tubeless conversion.

The more I ride this bike the more I love it. It's just so much fun.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Anyone got a weight for the 2016 Farley 5 out of the box stock with pedals pls?


----------



## Jmf003 (Nov 23, 2011)

Just picked my my Farley 9.6, size XL. Weighs 28.6 lbs with tubes, without pedals. 

Planning to convert to tubeless and will weigh the wheels while I have them off the bicycle.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Anyone got a weight for the 2016 Farley 5 out of the box stock with pedals pls?


Not with pedals but complete otherwise reflectors and all. 19.5 frame.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Natedeezy said:


> Not with pedals but complete otherwise reflectors and all. 19.5 frame.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ah great thanks for the info. 15kg then...was hoping for something a bit lighter but I suppose it is the entry level model. Do you run a bike shop or dealership? I was looking to get one in the UK but only a few places stocking them and one of those is Click & Collect and too far away from me.


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> Wasting money until you get rid off the low hanging fruit/weight in the cranks. A set of Next SL cranks will save you .9lbs


Can someone help me out with more details here? I am considering this option, but want to make sure I get it right. I have a 9.6, and here is what I am looking at going to:

Amazon.com : Race Face Next SL 10-11 Speed 175 Crank Arms with 170 Rears : Bike Cranksets And Accessories : Sports & Outdoors

Is this all that I need? Should I get the 170mm or the 175mm? I think my current one is a 175mm but I am not sure. Is this all that I need, and is it just a 'plug and play' to change the crank arm out, with the same bearings, sprocket, etc? Sorry for the dumb questions, but I don't want to order a $400 part and have it be wrong.

Thanks,


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

You'll need the appropriate bottom bracket to accommodate the 30mm spindle as the Aefect crank uses a 20mm spindle. 

Having said that, it's a lot of money even for that amount of weight - think on it. I'm still toying with it but I think I've decided I'd rather keep my money or spend it on some 29+ wheels, XT brakes, and maybe a suspension fork down the road.


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

New bike day, farley 9










No time for pictures, i built it and went riding

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

Just kidding, here's the important stuff

21.5" frame










Stock out of box weight









Thomson post, haven carbon bars, ESI grips, issi triple pedals, tubeless









His and hers, yep non drive side, in a hurry to go ride










Ride was awesome, going backwards from lous on shoes on my blackborow to this for a summer purpose bike, this wheel size makes sense to me

So long to my 29ers


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

How much lighter to the carbon bars feel in your hand compared to the stock ones? Just curious. I ask because I pulled the stock seat and seatpost out of one and it weighed next to nothing.


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

Gambit21 said:


> How much lighter to the carbon bars feel in your hand compared to the stock ones? Just curious. I ask because I pulled the stock seat and seatpost out of one and it weighed next to nothing.


The bars with the grips and garmin mount felt close to the weight of the stock bar alone, the haven bar is slightly narrower, its more for comfort than weight

Sent from my SCH-R530U using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Got it, thanks.
Waiting on my 7...


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Weighed a bone stock with pedals and reflectors 19.5" Farley 7 tonight. 30.38lbs, still waiting on my bike though...


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

jrogersAK said:


> Can someone help me out with more details here? I am considering this option, but want to make sure I get it right. I have a 9.6, and here is what I am looking at going to:
> 
> Amazon.com : Race Face Next SL 10-11 Speed 175 Crank Arms with 170 Rears : Bike Cranksets And Accessories : Sports & Outdoors
> 
> ...


If you order that set you will need a chainring as well...

Msg me if you would like to buy a complete setup, including chainring 170mm arm length bottom bracket as well


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

So...was about to buy a Farley 5 (against all my girlfriends protestation!) and looked at Evans and LeisureLakes Bikes and they are all Click & Collect and too far away for me to get the bike. Seems I am doomed to defeat but then found a local Trek dealer really close to me who thinks he can order in for me at cost price. WIN ! I am sure though once built those guys will not be able to resist having a go on it. Will update here if/when I get it. EXCITING !


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

So my wife took me bike shopping yesterday, and this it what i left with!!! :thumbsup:









WHAT A FUN BIKE OUT ON THE TRAILS first ride was the POTO in SE Michigan last night can't wait for a day ride!!!! just amazed at this thing.


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

I don't think they run small. The short seat tube height is to compensate for the increased standover height of the 4.9" tyres, so the frames appear short. Once set up though, my 17.5 feels like, well...a 17.5, despite my perceptions about the frame looking like a trials bike.



David Cooney said:


> Guys whats the story with the sizing for these farleys.......A few chaps have mentioned they run small ?
> 
> Im 5' 7" ? Obviously its going to be either a 15.5 or a 17.5.
> 
> Has anyone made that choice already ?


----------



## dEOS (May 25, 2009)

tadraper said:


> So my wife took me bike shopping yesterday, and this it what i left with!!! :thumbsup:


I don't know if I am more jealous of your bike or wife


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

The Trek archives show parts but not geometry for 2015 Farley 8. Do any of you know if 2015 Farley 8 geometry is same as 2016 models?

I've been wading through a lot of pages here and am trying to find out of a 19.5 2015 model will be quite like my 2016 Remedy in 19 size. Our Trek commuter is 20 and I think Treks must run small. I'm 5'10", and considering a used bike I might not be able to try before buy.

Thank you.


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

bitflogger said:


> The Trek archives show parts but not geometry for 2015 Farley 8. Do any of you know if 2015 Farley 8 geometry is same as 2016 models?
> 
> I've been wading through a lot of pages here and am trying to find out of a 19.5 2015 model will be quite like my 2016 Remedy in 19 size. Our Trek commuter is 20 and I think Treks must run small. I'm 5'10", and considering a used bike I might not be able to try before buy.
> 
> Thank you.


I believe the geometries are roughly the same, with maybe minor differences to handle the fatter tires.


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

bitflogger said:


> The Trek archives show parts but not geometry for 2015 Farley 8. Do any of you know if 2015 Farley 8 geometry is same as 2016 models?
> 
> I've been wading through a lot of pages here and am trying to find out of a 19.5 2015 model will be quite like my 2016 Remedy in 19 size. Our Trek commuter is 20 and I think Treks must run small. I'm 5'10", and considering a used bike I might not be able to try before buy.
> 
> Thank you.


I'm 5'10", and I ride a 18.5" Remedy 29, a 20" 7.4FX, and I chose a 17.5" Farley 7, the 19 just felt too long and big in general. I could probably get away with a 19.5" if I were to run a 50mm stem, but thats not ideal for this geometry.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

dEOS said:


> I don't know if I am more jealous of your bike or wife


my thoughts exactly! :lol:


----------



## Jmf003 (Nov 23, 2011)

More Farley 9.6 size XL weight info: 

Bicycle, tubeless with Xpedo Spry pedals: 27.4 lbs

27.5 Hodag tire: 1230 gr (only weighed one)

27.5 tube: 440 gr (both weighed the same)

27.5 wheels:
Front: 1300 gr
Rear: 1640 gr (seems too heavy but I've mounted the tire and can't recheck)


----------



## jcrab66 (Aug 17, 2015)

ZenkiS14 said:


> I'm 5'10", and I ride a 18.5" Remedy 29, a 20" 7.4FX, and I chose a 17.5" Farley 7, the 19 just felt too long and big in general. I could probably get away with a 19.5" if I were to run a 50mm stem, but thats not ideal for this geometry.


I got a 17.5 for my Farley 5, when I saw it I thought it looked small but when I rode it I found it to be perfect size, on the other hand the 19.5 Farley 6 seemed to be the right fit for me. I haven't compared geometry but they must be different...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

27.5 Jackalope rims should be about 930ish+ grams each. 
26 ones are supposed to be about 870 grams.
Counting 32 dt competition spokes at about 6 grams each is 192 grams.
brass nipples at 1 gram per nipples so 32grams.
that leaves about 486 grams for the hub. hope pro 2 fat is 370ish.

So, not horrible. but certianly not great. If they were cut out rims it would be less for sure. And the hub is heavy, but for a price point wheel, it is in line with most.

sure you could make lighter ones. but they would cost you near 1k.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

Can anyone help me find geometry for the pre-2016 bikes? The Trek archives don't have that. Some articles mention 70 degree head angle and 17.3 chain stays. I wasn't to know effective top tube, reach, and stack. To help decide if the used 19.5 in my area is too big for me.

Thank you.


----------



## bme107 (Jul 23, 2008)

tadraper said:


> So my wife took me bike shopping yesterday, and this it what i left with!!! :thumbsup:


Nice!

Back in 2011, for my birthday, my wife opened a profile here to see what I was in to and ask around some questions as to the types of bikes I'd be interested in. She called around to various shops to see who had what in my size. In my birthday card she outlined what was going down and where we could go to test ride. I made the decision and she called around to negotiate final pricing and pick up date. (Giant Anthem X 29er)

In late 2012 she was off of work doing some online shopping and called me to update. Jokingly, on a whim I told her, "while you're at it I'd like a 2013 Salsa Mukluk 2 frameset black/grape ape size small". An hour later she forwarded me the confirmation email for the purchase. When I got home she mentioned the guy on the phone at Bikeman proposed to her.


----------



## tschram72 (Oct 21, 2012)

So I decided to stop by my LBS yesterday hoping that my 7 came in and they've been trying to get ahold of me and had my cell number messed up. And low and behold, one lonely 7, size medium, was setting on the showroom floor! I'm like "hey, that's my bike!" and they were like, "what?". I told them that I put a deposit on a 7 about 2 months ago and have been waiting for a phone call. They said that this was one of the bikes that they preordered proir to me putting a deposit down, so that's why my name did not pop up in the system when it came in. Ugh! Luckly, it's only been sitting there since Tuesday and no one came in a swept it up in front of me! 

Heading out for a quick ride in about 30 minutes!


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

I normally just get kinky sex for my birthday, which I was perfectly happy with, until I caught up with this thread this AM. Now I feel a little short changed. Seriously, a fatbike for a birthday? Dude.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

setup my 9.8 tubeless today since it is raining,, what an easy task. remove air pop one side of the tire off to get tube out add sealant use floor pump to reseat tire!! 

my tubes weighed 1.45 lbs on the kitchen scale hope to weigh the bike soon.

did a mixer last night rail trail, gravel and trail what an all around great bike..


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

tschram72 said:


> So I decided to stop by my LBS yesterday hoping that my 7 came in and they've been trying to get ahold of me and had my cell number messed up. And low and behold, one lonely 7, size medium, was setting on the showroom floor! I'm like "hey, that's my bike!" and they were like, "what?". I told them that I put a deposit on a 7 about 2 months ago and have been waiting for a phone call. They said that this was one of the bikes that they preordered proir to me putting a deposit down, so that's why my name did not pop up in the system when it came in. Ugh! Luckly, it's only been sitting there since Tuesday and no one came in a swept it up in front of me!
> 
> Heading out for a quick ride in about 30 minutes!


Lies 
Pics or it didn't happen!


----------



## ForNow (Nov 10, 2014)

tadraper said:


> So my wife took me bike shopping yesterday, and this it what i left with!!! :thumbsup:
> 
> View attachment 1019265
> 
> ...


Fan of the bike and your truck.
I rode a Farley 9.8 today. Really liked it. Holding it for couple days to decide.
If I get the bike, I'll post a similar photo with my 2015 GMC HD.


----------



## Jolpe (Oct 4, 2015)

Hi everyone! 

I just bought myself farley 5 2016. I was planning to put bluto on the front. 
Im having trouble finding proper conversion caps for the hub. If anyone know what fits, ill be glad. 

I found drawings at the forum, so its possibility to mill them, but the drawing is from farley 6 and not sure that the hubs are same?

Thanks.


----------



## Vancity (Jul 2, 2012)

A question for any 9.8 owners... do you know what the Q-factor is on these Farleys? Is the Next SL the 170mm or 190mm wide version?

Thanks in advance!


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Not sure what the q-factor is but the next sl's on my 9.8 are for the 199mm The rear hub is 197 so the 170 version would be to narrow.


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

I hope it's a 169mm spindle and not 189mm. Trek has made a point of saying 5" clearance with 4" qfactor.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

I will go out and take a look and let you know.


----------



## DukeNeverwinter (May 6, 2006)

Jmf003 said:


> More Farley 9.6 size XL weight info:
> 
> Bicycle, tubeless with Xpedo Spry pedals: 27.4 lbs
> 
> ...


So just weighed my Hodag wheels.
1140front
1340rear

About a pound lighter than the Jackalopes. I wish they had used higher end lighter hubs. Probably could be 150-200 grams less.

Sent from my 831C using Tapatalk


----------



## Ftchmup (Jul 6, 2015)

Picked up my 7 today. Got some weight weenie info for you. 

All weights are with Spank spike pedals. 

Stock bike 30 lb 6 oz
Tubeless bike 29 lb 9 oz 
Bluto installed 31 lb 14 oz


----------



## Ftchmup (Jul 6, 2015)

Pic


----------



## bcriverjunky (Jul 8, 2014)

Ftchmup said:


> Pic


This is what Trek should have built. Sweet Ride!


----------



## Robg68 (Oct 27, 2013)

Ftchmup said:


> Pic


Sweet bike. Put on some blue rim strips and blue bottle holder. That purple frame is kick butt!!!


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

Tnx for the 7 pic, still waitin for mine, havent heard from my lbs yet, but hope to get a txt soon! 
The bluto fits the 7 just perfect!


----------



## cardnation (Jul 2, 2014)

Ftchmup said:


> Picked up my 7 today. Got some weight weenie info for you.
> 
> All weights are with Spank spike pedals.
> 
> ...


Did you happen to weigh the Barbegazi's?


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Just put a deposit down on a 5, expected 1st week of November. So excited! My girlfriend says it's the most crass, hideous, obscene thing she has ever seen...so now I KNOW I've done the right thing !


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Just put a deposit down on a 5, expected 1st week of November. So excited! My girlfriend says it's the most crass, hideous, obscene thing she has ever seen...so now I KNOW I've done the right thing !


The girl has some problems if that's true, good luck!


----------



## Ftchmup (Jul 6, 2015)

cardnation said:


> Did you happen to weigh the Barbegazi's?


I got total weight with tire,

Before after
Front 7lb 4oz 6lb 12oz
back 8lb 10oz 8lb 1oz

Oh, it is a 17.5" bike

What about red Grips, rim strips and red graphics on the shok??


----------



## Teton29er (Jul 31, 2011)

I got a 9.6 Farley. Here's my mini-review:

I spent about month researching bikes. This was a lot of money for me to spend, but fat biking year round is my primary recreation and a big part of my life. I wanted to move on from my highly upgraded pugs ops. Early in my search I started to focus on Trek. Each model seemed to have a leg up over the competitors as far as specs. The primary attractions of the Farley line was: thru axles, adjustable and short chainstays, 1x11, no tire limitations, reasonable Q-factor and good components for the money.

My main hesitation was the 27.5 x 80mm wheel set. Not sure I wanted any more diameter for my summer tires and I wasn't sure a slightly lower aspect tire was a good thing for rough trails. Plus, it seemed a little like a gimmick. I even made arrangements to trade the stock wheelset for a nice set of marge lites. But first I took her for a test ride.
Well "Sam I Am", I DO like 27.5 wheels! Probably partially due to the Trek geometry, they seemed more nimble and quick than my old 26x80mm wheels, while rolling over stuff just a tad bit better. Especially on some low angle gravel, the bike just kept gaining speed more than I was used to. It's not like the extra .75" radius changes the world or anything--it just seems like the bike is slightly faster, better at rolling over trail clutter and has no negative handling drawbacks.

So, sold on the new fangled wheel size, I proceeded to set up tubeless. Took just a few minutes to take out the 1 pound tube, put in stans, inflate with a floor pump. They are even pretaped for you. Compared to my rolling dayrls which required foam, split tube, compressor and chanting sacred spells, this was like pushing the big easy button. 

Yesterday I got in the first real hard ride of the bike on a loop with just about every trail condition. I was still wondering about the carbon fork. I'm a rigid kind of guy, and the front fork is very important. I've had carbon forks which are too dang stiff (whisky on my 29er) and carbon forks that are noodles and too soft (the carver on my pugs). Well, Trek's Fork is just right. No tweaking under hard braking, nice compliance and precision. SWEET!

The 11 speed drivetrain preformed perfectly after some adjustments after the first ride. Cable stretch I guess. I ditched the spoke protector once I was sure things were working well.

On yesterdays ride I ran about 10 pounds of pressure on everything from hard pack buff single track, gravel road and rocky hell atv trail (see pics). With my old 26x4 bike, it seemed like such delicate balancing act to get the pressure low enough to not be bouncy, but high enough to not have sluggish steering. Maybe it's my "new bike excitement" but I think I can run a little higher pressure with the 27.5's, to have excellent steering while still having good rock and root absorption.
I know one thing--I never once thought "gee, I wish I had smaller wheels with less rubber" It was fast and fun for every foot of the ride. 

Even though I blew the budget already with this bike, I'm going to go for a second wheelset for winter--clownshoes and 5" dillingers. But I can't wait to try out the 27.5's. I wouldn't be surprised if the stock wheelset gets used just as much or more.

One last thought: It seems like every year there is one or two fat bike brands which lead the pack. It's my opinion that this is Treks year. 

Happy Trails!


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

Thanks for the write up, Teton. I have a couple of weeks on my 9.6 with quite a bit of rough trail riding and mud riding, and I am still impressed. I hot some sharp roots and rocks where I was expecting to get a flat, but had no problem (I am tubeless as well). My biggest issue at this point is breaks. The Avids really like to howel, and scare the s**t out of the hikers when I am approaching and have to get on the brakes. Are others less than impressed with the brake noise? Should I just keep working them hard and hope it will go away? Maybe different pads before I give up on them? Overall, I am really happy with the bike. I agree with you on the tires as well. I was thinking about getting some Dillinger studded tires, but now I am thinking about holding off to see what comes out in 27.5 in the next year since they are working so well.


----------



## travisjgood (Apr 30, 2012)

I just got my Farley 5, does anyone know if the rear hub is shimano 11 speed compatible?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Damn that 7 is sweet - can't wait!


----------



## dRjOn (Feb 18, 2004)

has anyoneheard any whispers about the wampa 27.5 wheelset or rim being available aftermarket? ive been looking and havent seen any info...


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

travisjgood said:


> I just got my Farley 5, does anyone know if the rear hub is shimano 11 speed compatible?


shimano MTB 11 speed runs on standard 9/10 speed freehub


----------



## rain100 (Sep 12, 2014)

cardnation said:


> Did you happen to weigh the Barbegazi's?


I pulled the barbie tire off a farley 5 our shop got in, and it weighed 1375g.


----------



## cardnation (Jul 2, 2014)

rain100 said:


> I pulled the barbie tire off a farley 5 our shop got in, and it weighed 1375g.


Many thanks my friend!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

This is interesting. I'm planning on putting my Farley 5 on a diet when I get it. I'm probably gonna start with tubeless, then some Nukeproof Electron pedals, then maybe look at carbon bars. Any Farley 5+ owners got further suggestions?


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

depends how much you want to spend... at a certain point the 7 is the better route to start...


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Not too much! I was all set to buy a Norco Sight AL 7.1 2015 but then the Fat Bike brain worms took hold. I started my research looking at On-One Fattys (while nice looking bikes) but decided their bikes were still adhering to old standards. I had almost settled on the Canyon Dude (a superb spec Fat Bike) but couldn't live with the wait times...then I found Trek & here I am. People are already telling me it's a fad & there's nowhere here I can ride it but I disagree!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Some of u might like this..,keep an eye out for the 2 fat bikes. The first one is fully rigid & he's fairly shifting! This is a red bull event that runs in N.Ireland every year:


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> This is interesting. I'm planning on putting my Farley 5 on a diet when I get it. I'm probably gonna start with tubeless, then some Nukeproof Electron pedals, then maybe look at carbon bars. Any Farley 5+ owners got further suggestions?


You're really fighting an uphill battle there given the drivetrain etc. The carbon bars won't save you much either. Best bet is the 7 with the 1x drivetrain, carbon fork, lighter bars...
Save a little longer or don't worry about trying to cut weight from the 5.


----------



## travisjgood (Apr 30, 2012)

thanks TitanofChaos


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

Still digging my Farley 5. Unfortunately I've missed the last of the snow down here, and we're now into an earlier than usual bushfire season. Just a heads-up: the rear tyre buzzes the front derailleur when the Stranglehold dropout is set at its foremost position. I've subsequently set mine exactly in the middle for the time being but even more reason to convert to a 1x setup sooner rather than later. The lack of interface between Avid brake levers & Shimano shifter mounts is a minor set up flaw: I can get the brake levers perfectly set for 1 finger operation but then the shifter position, especially the front, can't be set optimally. Again...more fuel to prompt a move to the 1x campfire.


----------



## Low Miles (Oct 1, 2015)

*Trek Farley 7 shipping*

The Trek Farley 7's are hitting MN. No time for weighing or in depth reviewing, just snuck in a ride at the park on my way home from the LBS.

5" tires are definitely more than 1" of additional fun than 4" tires. Roots? What roots?

Can't wait to see how she handles in the snow.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> You're really fighting an uphill battle there given the drivetrain etc. The carbon bars won't save you much either. Best bet is the 7 with the 1x drivetrain, carbon fork, lighter bars...
> Save a little longer or don't worry about trying to cut weight from the 5.


yeah I suppose. As my first venture into Fat Biking I didn't want to spend too much. Will probably just go tubeless to begin. Still want some cash set aside for a Giant Defy 0 or maybe a Norco Sight. Might check with my dealer though how much he can get the 7 for. Didn't see it listed on the UK sites...they go from 5's right up to 9's.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Fat Dan said:


> Still digging my Farley 5. Unfortunately I've missed the last of the snow down here, and we're now into an earlier than usual bushfire season. Just a heads-up: the rear tyre buzzes the front derailleur when the Stranglehold dropout is set at its foremost position. I've subsequently set mine exactly in the middle for the time being but even more reason to convert to a 1x setup sooner rather than later. The lack of interface between Avid brake levers & Shimano shifter mounts is a minor set up flaw: I can get the brake levers perfectly set for 1 finger operation but then the shifter position, especially the front, can't be set optimally. Again...more fuel to prompt a move to the 1x campfire.


have exact same issue on my 2012 Anthem with Avid brakes and Shimano shifters. Problem is compounded by a Reverb dropper. Wish these manufacturers would pull their finger out and allow cross matching of parts. I know it's against their interests but it frustrates the hell out of me.


----------



## lvd (Sep 10, 2015)

picked up my 7 yesterday! probably won't get to take it out on dirt until this weekend, but it was even fun riding home from the shop on pavement with this thing


----------



## Mr. Miyagi (Oct 8, 2015)

Which one should I buy; Farley 6 2015 or Farley 5 2016? I like the paint job of 6 more. What are the differences? Price is about the same.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

lvd said:


> picked up my 7 yesterday! probably won't get to take it out on dirt until this weekend, but it was even fun riding home from the shop on pavement with this thing


I don't think Trek are selling the 7 in the UK here. I can't see it anywhere. Nice looking bike.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Loving that purple LVD. Sweet looking machine.


----------



## Ftchmup (Jul 6, 2015)

7777


----------



## surlybugger (Jan 26, 2013)

*Tubeless Woes*

The split-tube method works super great on my Moonie, but I can't do split-tube method on the 2016 Farly-5's mulefut rims, due to the tubeless ready tire being so tight (not to mention the trek-recammended valves won't work on a single wall rim).

Anyhoo, the mulefut rim, then the liner, with tuck-tape sealing it (left overnight with the tube in, mashing the tape down). This morning I went to put some TLR sauce in them (great stuff by the way), but it and the air come out the rim seams.

I'm stumped. I mean, it must be passing through the tape (hence why I love split-tube), but from inspection, I can't find where.

Does anyone have a some suggestions?


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

Email from my lbs today, they will have it ready tomorrow, or saturday! Can't sleep


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

My LBS had me do a little test ride on a Stache 7 (same color). I'm afraid if he had a Farley 7 I wouldn't be able to walk away.


----------



## Teton29er (Jul 31, 2011)

surlybugger said:


> The split-tube method works super great on my Moonie, but I can't do split-tube method on the 2016 Farly-5's mulefut rims, due to the tubeless ready tire being so tight (not to mention the trek-recammended valves won't work on a single wall rim).
> 
> Anyhoo, the mulefut rim, then the liner, with tuck-tape sealing it (left overnight with the tube in, mashing the tape down). This morning I went to put some TLR sauce in them (great stuff by the way), but it and the air come out the rim seams.
> 
> ...


HI Surly,
I had a few failures with black gorilla tape myself. Finally I used two wraps and filled the little rim holes with epoxy and it worked like a charm. But later have learned that this tape is not ideal, even as popular as it is. I'd suggest using the 78mm tape made for for this rim:

https://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=69721&category=139

many have not filled the little holes and had good results as long as the tape covers them.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

What is so hard about using the actual tape sold for these rims and proven to work? Start there rather than almost intentuonaly and inexplicably asking for problems.


----------



## surlybugger (Jan 26, 2013)

Teton29er said:


> HI Surly,
> I had a few failures with black gorilla tape myself. Finally I used two wraps and filled the little rim holes with epoxy and it worked like a charm. But later have learned that this tape is not ideal, even as popular as it is. I'd suggest using the 78mm tape made for for this rim:
> 
> https://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=69721&category=139
> ...


Thanks for the kit link and info. Funny you mentioned epoxy resin. I let some wick into the one rim with the leaky rim seam.



Gambit21 said:


> What is so hard about using the actual tape sold for these rims and proven to work? Start there rather than almost intentuonaly and inexplicably asking for problems.


I just discovered the actual tape kit now, upon recieiving the reply notifications. First thing I did was ask trek what to do. The reply was info regurgitated from the known methods discussed elsewhere on this fine site, and obviously the tech had never done it on the actual rim he was talking about, becuse what he said to use would not actually work. The kits they offered were for the jackalope rim too.

I figured the tuck tape, because it was thin. Well see how the hold; and if not, the kit above to solve it for good.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I think you'll have good luck with the Sun tape - should be trouble free.
FYI there is a Mulefut 80sl thread here, if you haven't seen it yet. Dig it up and
give it a gander.


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

Picked up my Farley 7 at J&R Cycle and Ski in Villa Park, IL yesterday. Great folks to work with, I called and they dropped what they were doing to assemble the bike so I could pick it up on my way through Chicago (my lbs at home said they wouldn't have one until January, if at all). 

Loving it so far, it's my first fat bike. Parts ordered to convert to tubeless, and a Bluto is in my future as well.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

pics or it didn't happen


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Ftchmup said:


> Pic


Were you able to reuse the crown race from the stock fork with the Bluto?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

It should work


----------



## Ftchmup (Jul 6, 2015)

Paochow said:


> Were you able to reuse the crown race from the stock fork with the Bluto?


LBS ordered another crown race so changing between forks is easier. They are interchangeable according to the LBS.


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

Finally after a long wait my Farley 9.8 is here!

Trek Farley by https://www.flickr.com/photos/crohnsy/, on Flickr

24.53lb as it sits.. tubeless 4oz of stans in each wheel with alloy valves. bumped the front rotor to 180mm with adapter. also swapped grips to ODI SLs and switch stem to Race Face Turbine 60mm and Ti rotor bolts. Need to chop the steerer, apply some frame savers swap the housing to Alligator iLink. remove the warning labels..

Some notes...

was able to setup front wheel tubeless with just my Lezyne floor pump.

Front wheel - 1160g
Rear wheel - 1355g
Tires - 1290g, 1295g

Crankset has ring flipped which would should mean 169mm spindle. Will confirm next week when my new chainring comes in.


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> pics or it didn't happen


Argh, busted! I made it all up.


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

Picked up my 19,5" farley (i'm 5ft,11in) 7 half an hour ago. Sweeeet 
I did not understand the pic uploader, so I gave up...
Ordered a bluto as well. Probably goin for a little ride now


----------



## ghsmith54 (Sep 25, 2015)

crohnsy said:


> Finally after a long wait my Farley 9.8 is here!
> 
> Trek Farley by https://www.flickr.com/photos/crohnsy/, on Flickr
> 
> ...


Are those the stock bars & grips? If so, they're different from my recently purchased 9.8. Trek might have made a running change.

Also, what chainring are you putting on?

Thanks.


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

The bars are stock. Rxl carbons. Grips are after market. Odi longneck sl's changed the stem from rxl 80 to turbine 60

Just switching to a red race face ring.


----------



## JaMMu76 (Jan 19, 2008)

*Farley 9.6*

With small mods


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

Mr. Miyagi said:


> Which one should I buy; Farley 6 2015 or Farley 5 2016? I like the paint job of 6 more. What are the differences? Price is about the same.


I might be biased, but the 6 probably has slightly better components. However it is limited to four inch tires. This has not been a problem for me in NW Wisconsin. I love my 6 for both single track and winter. I debated upgrading to a 7 primarily because I think the purple looks awesome, but opted to purchase a Surly Karate Monkey SS instead. If I was buying a new fat today, It'd be the 7.

Bottom line, you couldn't go wrong with either. What is the price on the 6?


----------



## Teton29er (Jul 31, 2011)

JaMMu76 said:


> With small mods
> View attachment 1021328


That is absolutely beautiful! Well done!

I'm looking at doing clownshoe version of that for winter.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

*A nice mixer this morning*

A few pics from my ride this morning


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Takes the single track better than I thought it would.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Natedeezy said:


> Takes the single track better than I thought it would.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I really enjoy mine out on the trail I got about 20 miles single track this morning and another 12 gravel/paved to get there and home. Thing is just a blast to ride.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

tadraper said:


> A few pics from my ride this morning
> 
> View attachment 1021530
> 
> ...


Nice bike..lol like the 27.5 wheel size but hoping there are more options coming sooner rather than later.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## surlybugger (Jan 26, 2013)

Gambit21 said:


> I think you'll have good luck with the Sun tape - should be trouble free.
> FYI there is a Mulefut 80sl thread here, if you haven't seen it yet. Dig it up and
> give it a gander.


Thanks Gambit. I'll hunt it down and send the link to my buddies that own the things.

It's a pity they have to spend so much with Treks system.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

JaMMu76 said:


> With small mods
> View attachment 1021328


Looks beasty with the Bud and Lou!:thumbsup:


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Paochow said:


> Looks beasty with the Bud and Lou!:thumbsup:


I wish there was a 27.5 bud and Lou. I ran those on my fatback. Maybe next year we will get some different options.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

JaMMu76 said:


> With small mods
> View attachment 1021328


That looks gnarly man!


----------



## tennismike (Oct 5, 2015)

*1st post.*

After following this thread since it was at 2 pages, I am happy say that "this" happened today:









No big mods, my saddle, tubeless... had a great ride this evening and look forward to riding tomorrow.

thanks to everyone else for posting all the pics.... has been a fun wait.


----------



## urmb (Oct 4, 2005)

Stopped by my LBS and they had two Farley 9.6s. Stock large with tubes and without pedals was 28.2 pounds. Bike felt solid on the test drive. Was tempted at 2999. Don't want a press fit BB though.

Side note they have had three Whiskey carbon rim failures. Saw one. Broken at two different locations. Said it was a bad batch..

urmb


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

*Farley 7 First Ride*

Got out on the trails in Percy Warner Park in Nashville today. We ran into probably a dozen other riders, at least half of whom said "nice fattie!". I didn't think I was that out of shape, but maybe the trail riding will do me some good. They damn sure better not have been talking about my wife.


----------



## tschram72 (Oct 21, 2012)

I've got a few rides in now and am absolutely loving this bike! I converted to tubeless and damn those tubes were heavy! I used the SR tape that is made for the rims, worked like a dream!

Ran into a couple of fellow Farley owners at the Arcadia Dunes yesterday, they were sporting the 6 and 8 from last year. It was great shooting the s**t with them! One of them mentioned a Farley group on FB, anyone have a link to that?


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

That was us! Here ya go.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/TrexFarley/

I like this one too:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/326108427417580/


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

tadraper said:


> I wish there was a 27.5 bud and Lou. I ran those on my fatback. Maybe next year we will get some different options.


The problem is if Surly made a 27.5x4.8 bud and lou it likely wouldn't fit in the Farley or any other production frame for that matter. The diameter would be in the 32" range. In order to increase the width, you'd also need to increase the diameter, so I'm not sure if you will be able to go much wider on the current Trek frames without dropping down to the 26" rims.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Paochow said:


> The problem is if Surly made a 27.5x4.8 bud and lou it likely wouldn't fit in the Farley or any other production frame for that matter. The diameter would be in the 32" range. In order to increase the width, you'd also need to increase the diameter, so I'm not sure if you will be able to go much wider on the current Trek frames without dropping down to the 26" rims.


I agree 100% i just want a bud an lou that will fit say 27.5x4.25 or something. i am sure my wheels and tires will work fine in most all conditions i ride. i just know that my bud and lou worked great year round without any thoughts.


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

Paochow said:


> The problem is if Surly made a 27.5x4.8 bud and lou it likely wouldn't fit in the Farley or any other production frame for that matter. The diameter would be in the 32" range. In order to increase the width, you'd also need to increase the diameter, so I'm not sure if you will be able to go much wider on the current Trek frames without dropping down to the 26" rims.


I think you are forgetting about the sliding dropouts.... also if a 26X4.8 will fit, then a 27.5 will fit for width but with dropouts further back...


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

crohnsy said:


> I think you are forgetting about the sliding dropouts.... also if a 26X4.8 will fit, then a 27.5 will fit for width but with dropouts further back...


Maybe we will get to see when someone makes them!!


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

crohnsy said:


> I think you are forgetting about the sliding dropouts.... also if a 26X4.8 will fit, then a 27.5 will fit for width but with dropouts further back...


I realize it has them, but I thought they were in the back position to fit a 26x4.8"? If it will fit the 4.8" with them forward then yes the extra 15mm would give enough to to fit an extra 30mm in diameter, which the 27.5" tire should be about 1.5" bigger (38mm), so it would be pretty close.

I agree that width shouldn't be an issue, unless the slightly rounder tire shape hits the front of the chainstay or something like on the Framed bikes.

It it did fit it would likely look like Blackborrows running the giant Snowshoe XXL's as it would have a similar or slightly larger diameter.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Added some red bits to the Farley today!!







:thumbsup:


----------



## tschram72 (Oct 21, 2012)

Paochow said:


> I realize it has them, but I thought they were in the back position to fit a 26x4.8"? If it will fit the 4.8" with them forward then yes the extra 15mm would give enough to to fit an extra 30mm in diameter, which the 27.5" tire should be about 1.5" bigger (38mm), so it would be pretty close.
> 
> I agree that width shouldn't be an issue, unless the slightly rounder tire shape hits the front of the chainstay or something like on the Framed bikes.
> 
> It it did fit it would likely look like Blackborrows running the giant Snowshoe XXL's as it would have a similar or slightly larger diameter.


I can confirm that the Barbegazi does fit with the sliders all the way forward, and with a lot of room still! This is how I've had mine since day one.


----------



## Teton29er (Jul 31, 2011)

tschram72 said:


> I can confirm that the Barbegazi does fit with the sliders all the way forward, and with a lot of room still! This is how I've had mine since day one.


Yep. 27.5 all the way forward for me too. Max playfull and max rear traction.

I love coming into technical section of the trail and having the option of either dancing around each rock or just rolling over everything. Decision making is always easier when there is no wrong answer...


----------



## tennismike (Oct 5, 2015)

Bad news for my 9.6: 
Day 5 - great ride, but noticed at 10/12 lbs of pressure (tubeless) that the sides of the front tire will "bottom" out to the rim on hard hit roots/rocks, etc... definitely needed more air, but I am a big dude... so I wouldn't mind going up a pound or two, but not really excited about running them too bouncy..

Day 6 - After finished up in the dark last night I put the bike away and went to put air in the front tire today. Put 17lbs of pressure in it to see how it behaves. Went to put air in the rear and BAM - rear rim is bent/dented badly. Air was holding, but the bike is back in the shop. Don't know what is going to happen with the rim if it will be replaced, if I will pay, etc.. BUT the bigger issue I have is that I wasn't that hard on them and I don't want a bike that I have to "baby" on the trail... we will see...


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Tennismike what wheels do you have and which Farley do you have? Thanks

i see now could not see the farley version on my phone!!! hope they fix you up right and that it was just a bad wheel..


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Well that illustrates exactly what I've been saying about Treks decision to go with 80mm carbon rims instead of 65mm aluminum (or carbon for that matter). Pretty short sighted, and one reason I went with a 7.
Sorry to hear if your problem, but it doesn't surprise me in the least. With that shorter sidewall and wide rim, those carbon rims are just waiting to be clouted by a rock.


----------



## bcriverjunky (Jul 8, 2014)

The 9.6 doesn't have carbon wheels...


Gambit21 said:


> Well that illustrates exactly what I've been saying about Treks decision to go with 80mm carbon rims instead of 65mm aluminum (or carbon for that matter). Pretty short sighted, and one reason I went with a 7.
> Sorry to hear if your problem, but it doesn't surprise me in the least. With that shorter sidewall and wide rim, those carbon rims are just waiting to be clouted by a rock.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yeah you're right, missed that.
Same thing applies though with regard to rim width and those tires.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

tadraper said:


> Added some red bits to the Farley today!!
> 
> View attachment 1022423
> :thumbsup:


Tad that is a SAHWEET looking machine.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Gambit21 said:


> Yeah you're right, missed that.
> Same thing applies though with regard to rim width and those tires.


I would counter by saying every rim width has been damaged at one time or another.


----------



## bcriverjunky (Jul 8, 2014)

I agree with you there. I think we'll be seeing more of this.


Gambit21 said:


> Yeah you're right, missed that.
> Same thing applies though with regard to rim width and those tires.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

litespeedaddict said:


> I would counter by saying every rim width has been damaged at one time or another.


Well that's like saying people have died in car accidents even though they had their seat belts on. Sure, but doesn't mean it isn't less likely if a different decision is made.


----------



## tennismike (Oct 5, 2015)

When I find out if I am "paying" for this tomorrow, I will be deciding wether or not I will be switching to 26 inch wheels or perhaps this is an anomaly? The thing is that when demoing the 9.8 I went back after 1 minute in the skills park with the carbon wheel set and had them add more air when I noticed the same thing...


bcriverjunky said:


> I agree with you there. I think we'll be seeing more of this.


----------



## Teton29er (Jul 31, 2011)

litespeedaddict said:


> I would counter by saying every rim width has been damaged at one time or another.


I've been riding 80's with 3.8 tires for years and just have a few dings here and there.
the 27.5's with 3.8 " don't look all that much different to me--same width, just a little less sidewall height. And since I like to run the 27.5 slightly higher pressure, I feel there isn't any increased risk of rim destruction. I think I'll worry about other stuff when I'm out riding...


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

What I meant, and obviously I did a horrible job saying it, is no matter the width or material it could fail. I wouldn't read much into this failure at all and yes I agree, I'd worry about other stuff as well.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

tennismike said:


> Bad news for my 9.6:
> Day 5 - great ride, but noticed at 10/12 lbs of pressure (tubeless) that the sides of the front tire will "bottom" out to the rim on hard hit roots/rocks, etc... definitely needed more air, but I am a big dude... so I wouldn't mind going up a pound or two, but not really excited about running them too bouncy..
> 
> Day 6 - After finished up in the dark last night I put the bike away and went to put air in the front tire today. Put 17lbs of pressure in it to see how it behaves. Went to put air in the rear and BAM - rear rim is bent/dented badly. Air was holding, but the bike is back in the shop. Don't know what is going to happen with the rim if it will be replaced, if I will pay, etc.. BUT the bigger issue I have is that I wasn't that hard on them and I don't want a bike that I have to "baby" on the trail... we will see...


That's a bummer man.

I have been out a few times on my Farley 5 and have been running my tires around 6 or 7 PSI. 17+ seems high to me? I am 230lb for the record.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

moshock said:


> That's a bummer man.
> 
> I have been out a few times on my Farley 5 and have been running my tires around 6 or 7 PSI. 17+ seems high to me? I am 230lb for the record.


 The F5 has bigger tires than the 9.6, no worries, secondly I imagine the guys with Wampa rims are really nervous about it.

FYI, any Trek Farley owners want to join the FB group here it is: https://www.facebook.com/groups/TrexFarley/


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

litespeedaddict said:


> What I meant, and obviously I did a horrible job saying it, is no matter the width or material it could fail. I wouldn't read much into this failure at all and yes I agree, I'd worry about other stuff as well.


You did a fine job, but again it's like saying you can also die if you're wearing a seatbelt. Same difference. I'd also worry about other stuff instead, but it would be easier for me personally with a bit more sidewall and/or rounder profile.


----------



## Mattoid (Aug 1, 2006)

Just picked up a '16 Farley 7 - 29.67 lbs bone stock without pedals for size large. I have a 100mm Bluto RCT3 on order for it, but it's back ordered. How would a 120mm Bluto, (which is available) do on it? The build will be pretty aggro with a dropper, shortie stem and all, so maybe it'd be fitting? Share any opinions on how the longer fork would be. 

The bike is gorgeous. I wasn't sure if I *needed* this thing in my life. But now I know I do. #purplepeopleater


----------



## Ftchmup (Jul 6, 2015)

*120mm Bluto*

_""Just picked up a '16 Farley 7 - 29.67 lbs bone stock without pedals for size large. I have a 100mm Bluto RCT3 on order for it, but it's back ordered. How would a 120mm Bluto, (which is available) do on it? The build will be pretty aggro with a dropper, shortie stem and all, so maybe it'd be fitting? Share any opinions on how the longer fork would be_. ""

Kind like this.... A bit "twitchy" at first. Dropped air to 9 and 9.5 in the front. Seems to be fine. May try a 60mm stem. Been having a ball on it!!! I am no pro, just having fun!


----------



## tennismike (Oct 5, 2015)

27.5 Bent Rim update:

No trek wheelsets or rims available until LATE NOVEMBER....there's always a risk being an early adopter, but a bummer to be sidelined with a $3k bike for more than a month. Not real stoked at the moment.


moshock said:


> That's a bummer man.
> 
> I have been out a few times on my Farley 5 and have been running my tires around 6 or 7 PSI. 17+ seems high to me? I am 230lb for the record.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

That is a real bummer man, so stoked to have a new bike and can't ride it. Bummer.


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

I went back and reread Tennismike's posts, and I I am not having this experience. I am riding a lot of really tight trails with lots of roots, rocks and stumps, and yesterday at the top of a mountain with a lot of loose bedrock that I went through pretty fast and hard. I went out and looked at my rims, and all is good. There are some pretty good marks on the sidewalls, but the stop at about 1/2 to 3/4 of the way up the sidewall. I could see how any rim could get a strike, given the rock or root is at the right angle, and that the 27.5 would be more likely since it is a shorter sidewall. As for bottoming the rim on hits, I can't say I can focus on the rim and tire when running hard down a little rough trail, but it does not seem like I am anywhere close to bottoming it. I have been running 9 psi in the back and 8 psi in the front.


----------



## Teton29er (Jul 31, 2011)

Sorry about the rim Tennis. Big bummer. Maybe it's a good time to get some clownshoes for snow riding?

The more I look at it, I think I'm l no more likely to hit the rim with the 27.5 as a 26 . I've been using about 10 or 12 pounds, compared to my 26's which I like 8 pounds. The rim is indeed a little closer to the ground, but it's also tucked in a little closer the the wide part of the tire. 

Here's a few pics. The 27 rim is about 3/8" closer to the ground than on my wifes 26 farley.


----------



## sowleman (Jul 22, 2006)

Interesting thoughts on tires and 26 vs 27.5. I just switched from a Farley 6 to a 9.8 and I have gone down in tire pressure if I ran 10/11 on the 26, Im now at 9/9.5 on the 27.5. Im riding same trails, rocks, roots etc no problem. I weigh 200 lbs


----------



## tennismike (Oct 5, 2015)

Trust me, I hope NOBODY has any issues, that I get a new rim and life is grand. The mechanic that I trust at the LBS brought up a good point. The sidewall and tire is a bit soft for me, so perhaps when 45NRTH or somebody make another tire choice that will be the answer for me. Until then, my plan is get a new rim (sometime), up the pressure and potentially put my tubes back in. On a side note they also have a broken carbon rim in the shop from a 9.8... certainly doesn't mean anything, but it means there is some other dude who paid a chunk of change who is also sidelined.


sowleman said:


> Interesting thoughts on tires and 26 vs 27.5. I just switched from a Farley 6 to a 9.8 and I have gone down in tire pressure if I ran 10/11 on the 26, Im now at 9/9.5 on the 27.5. Im riding same trails, rocks, roots etc no problem. I weigh 200 lbs
> 
> View attachment 1022869


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Sucks to have a new bike sidelined- I was there last winter with my Fatboy and the rear hub. I worried about it even after it was fixed, and ended up buying a better hub to replace it, just so I could fix it myself if needed and not have to to wait for parts at the LBS.

Instead of missing the best part of the riding season in MN, you could consider picking up a set of 26" rims and tires. Used sets pop up from time to time in the classifieds, Craigslist, and Fatbike trader on FB. If you have the cash- the DT Swiss BR 2250 wheelset can be found in the $700+duty range on the Euro sites and is actually a few hundred grams lighter than the 9.8 wheels. Grab a set of aggressive 4.8's and you'll be set to tear up some leaf and snow covered trails. 

If if you think this may be a reoccurring issue, or will have to run compromises like higher psi or tubes to prevent it; you may want to consider 26x4.8 anyway. I'm willing to bet there are plenty of riders who will buy your 27.5" wheels if you decided to sell them.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> Well that illustrates exactly what I've been saying about Treks decision to go with 80mm carbon rims instead of 65mm aluminum (or carbon for that matter). Pretty short sighted, and one reason I went with a 7.
> Sorry to hear if your problem, but it doesn't surprise me in the least. With that shorter sidewall and wide rim, those carbon rims are just waiting to be clouted by a rock.


Yup, remember all the flak we got for saying so back in June.....
http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/27-5x4-whos-excited-whos-not-979984.html#post12054671


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

Paochow said:


> If you have the cash- the DT Swiss BR 2250 wheelset can be found in the $700+duty range on the Euro sites and is actually a few hundred grams lighter than the 9.8 wheels. Grab a set of aggressive 4.8's and you'll be set to tear up some leaf and snow covered trails. .


I am considering this same thing for my 9.6. Can someone point me to the specifics that I should get. I understand that it is a matter of personal preference, but does someone put out a wheel set up for my bike? I was thinking about putting a set of Dillinger 5 studded on them for the winter and using my 27.5 for the summer. I would like to go wider for winter, but it does not seem like there are many options. Is the saran wrap tubeless the best way to go with this setup?


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

Ok, I will try and answer my own question as a starting point:

DT Swiss 2250 Front Wheel $413
DT Swiss Rear Wheel $511
2ea Snowshoe XL 4.8 Studded $276

Any problem with my selection? It seems like it will fit, but I am a bit nervous on a purchase this big. Any feedback is appreciated. I could not find any euro sites as mentioned, but I compared with Ebay and this seems like reasonable pricing. I think the rims I listed are 80mm. Should I be looking at 100mm?


----------



## new8812 (Aug 14, 2014)

The snowshoe aren't the best for snow, to say the least... The dillinger are way better, and $$$ but the value is there.

The wheels are 80mm and are the best before you go carbon. (in fact, if you would get this rim as original on your bike, it wouldn't worth to go to carbon). Depending on your weight, you should be ok with 80mm.

As for clingwrap, it is the thing, point! ;o)


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

jrogersAK said:


> I am considering this same thing for my 9.6. Can someone point me to the specifics that I should get. I understand that it is a matter of personal preference, but does someone put out a wheel set up for my bike? I was thinking about putting a set of Dillinger 5 studded on them for the winter and using my 27.5 for the summer. I would like to go wider for winter, but it does not seem like there are many options. Is the saran wrap tubeless the best way to go with this setup?


Bike-discount.de has the best price I have seen, but they are out of stock. DT Swiss BR 2250 Classic 26" Fatbike Wheelset Disc CL | Wheel 26" Sets Shop. The price varies with the Euro-Dollar swing, but is generally significantly lower than the prices you list.

Shrink wrap tubeless works very well with this rim type. Other options are in this thread: http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/dt-swiss-br2250-rim-961462.html

D5's are fast rolling, but don't grip as well for the deep stuff. I just bought a set of Snowshoe XL's and will be testing them out this winter http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/bud-lou-versus-dillinger-5-a-938358.html


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

Thank you for the details. The whole shrink wrap thing seems like it could be an issue. When i look at carbon wheels (ICAN) the 90mm ones are about the same weight as well as the same price as the DT Swiss wheels, and I don't have to deal with the holes to go tubeless. I assume that the difference would be in the quality of the product? Any other downsides to the carbon wheels?

Amazon.com : ICAN Fat Tire Clincher Carbon Wheelset 26er 90mm Compatible Tubeless 32/32h Black Powerway Hub 135/197mm : Sports & Outdoors


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

jrogersAK said:


> Thank you for the details. The whole shrink wrap thing seems like it could be an issue. When i look at carbon wheels (ICAN) the 90mm ones are about the same weight as well as the same price as the DT Swiss wheels, and I don't have to deal with the holes to go tubeless. I assume that the difference would be in the quality of the product? Any other downsides to the carbon wheels?
> 
> Amazon.com : ICAN Fat Tire Clincher Carbon Wheelset 26er 90mm Compatible Tubeless 32/32h Black Powerway Hub 135/197mm : Sports & Outdoors


135/195 fits no farley, 13-15 were 135/170 and 16 is 150/190


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

So I would need this:

http://www.amazon.com/ICAN-Clincher...5276916&sr=1-2&keywords=ican+wheelset+150+190

for the Farley 9.6? Hopefully I can get it without the red hubs... Any comments on how this compares with the DT Swiss 2250?


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

jrogersAK said:


> So I would need this:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/ICAN-Clincher...5276916&sr=1-2&keywords=ican+wheelset+150+190
> 
> for the Farley 9.6? Hopefully I can get it without the red hubs... Any comments on how this compares with the DT Swiss 2250?


Those wheels have a Shimano freehub and will need a XD freehub to work with the XD cassette on your 9.6.

To compare the two- The ICAN's are a lower end carbon wheel with cheaper hubs, I don't have any direct experience with them, so not sure how they work long term. There is some feedback in this thread: http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/ican-bikes-carbon-65-90mm-rims-924107.html

The DT Swiss are a mid level aluminum wheel/hub. My friend owns a set and loves them. I had a set of them briefly that I sold to buy my Bucksaw. They were very well made and weighed slightly less than the quoted weights. Tubeless with shrink wrap is pretty straightforward.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

*And so it begins....*


----------



## rain100 (Sep 12, 2014)

I measured the 27.5" hodag, and the bead to bead was 215mm. This is somewhat less than most 3.8" tires. I think that these tires would work well on 50mm wide rims.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Hi all, new to the forum.
I just test rode the Farley 9 and the Farley 9.8.

I like the 9 for the Bluto up front and the 9.8 for all of the carbon in its glory.

I am torn between the two.

I plan on riding this thing year round. Not sure if that is what will actually happen though.

Anyone of you with the new Farley's plan on riding year round?


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> Hi all, new to the forum.
> I just test rode the Farley 9 and the Farley 9.8.
> 
> I like the 9 for the Bluto up front and the 9.8 for all of the carbon in its glory.
> ...


I have the 9.8 and will ride it year round. I have had it 3 weeks today have around 300 miles mixed gravel and trail. i see the benefit of the bluto and may get one next year but i am a fan of rigid as well.

either bike you decide on will be lots of fun i am sure of it.

T


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Well I was on my way up north for some bow hunting and the LBS called me to let me know the 9.8 was in. So I picked it up!

This thing is so light, it is sick!

I stuffed into the back of my Jeep and now I want to go ride the Big M!
(After I get a deer)


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Pfff! Just go ride and forget about shooting things.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Big M that sounds like a great first ride!!!!


----------



## rain100 (Sep 12, 2014)

LunchRider said:


> Hi all, new to the forum.
> I just test rode the Farley 9 and the Farley 9.8.
> 
> I like the 9 for the Bluto up front and the 9.8 for all of the carbon in its glory.
> ...


I got the 9 and also plan on riding it year round. I have slick honey that should make the bluto viable in cold temperatures, and I'm looking at building another wheelset with 26 x 4.8 tires for the winter.


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

So Stoked! Just got word that my Farley 7 is shipping today!


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

ZenkiS14 said:


> So Stoked! Just got word that my Farley 7 is shipping today!


The more I look at that purple Machine the more I want one.


----------



## Sevenz (Jul 17, 2009)

RockyJo1 said:


> The more I look at that purple Machine the more I want one.


Got mine Monday...Pics don't do this bike justice...


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

Sevenz said:


> Got mine Monday...Pics don't do this bike justice...


Shop right down the road has one. It is 2 pounds lighter than the X7 Bear grease.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

My post from another thread. We'll see if I own the 7 on Monday. 


New guy here. I know nothing about fat bikes other than reading all 22 pages of the 2016 Trek Farley thread. TWICE. And this thread once. 

Currently riding a Trek 8.4 DS and looking for a winter bike.

I am very close to pulling the trigger on a Farely 7 but 75% of my miles will be commuting (5 miles one way, up hill both ways, literally) in the winter and 25% on a Minnesota MBT with whatever snow conditions that brings with it. 

Nervous as a long tailed cat in a rocking chair store that the 4.8" tires are going to be too big for my purpose. 

Can a narrower tire (4"?) be mounted on the 80 mm rim? 

Going to test ride it Monday so that should help.


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

FT251 said:


> View attachment 1023198


opcorn:


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> My post from another thread. We'll see if I own the 7 on Monday.
> 
> New guy here. I know nothing about fat bikes other than reading all 22 pages of the 2016 Trek Farley thread. TWICE. And this thread once.
> 
> ...


We answered your question in that other thread yeah?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Sevenz said:


> Got mine Monday...Pics don't do this bike justice...


Beautiful! Can't wait to get mine.
Oh and Cannondale, although not the shortest stays on the market, this at minimum is what a short-stay fat bike looks like - dummies.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Yessir. Since I may be purchasing the bike I thought I would add to the 21 pages.


----------



## TrekStache (Oct 23, 2015)

Just picked up my 9, ended up coming a month early. Looks sick can't wait to take it for a long ride tomorrow. Only thing I need to do is air up the fork, I forgot to have my LBS take care of it.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

LunchRider said:


> Hi all, new to the forum.
> I just test rode the Farley 9 and the Farley 9.8.
> 
> I like the 9 for the Bluto up front and the 9.8 for all of the carbon in its glory.
> ...


Simple decision. Get the 9.8 and buy an after market bluto. I've seen them for $450. Problem solved. If you get the 9 now, you are gonna want to upgrade to carbon frame later on. Avoid all that and get the 9.8 and slap a bluto on there if its in your budget.

Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk


----------



## TrekStache (Oct 23, 2015)

Will take more pictures on my ride tomorrow


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

LunchRider said:


> Hi all, new to the forum.
> I just test rode the Farley 9 and the Farley 9.8.
> 
> I like the 9 for the Bluto up front and the 9.8 for all of the carbon in its glory.
> ...


 I went with the 9.8, hoping theres more than just the Bluto for options come spring time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> Well I was on my way up north for some bow hunting and the LBS called me to let me know the 9.8 was in. So I picked it up!
> 
> This thing is so light, it is sick!
> 
> ...


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

And back home for some evening Bow hunting.

I might be hanging up the 29er and making this my main bike.
I will have to get it on some single track.
More specifically "Torn Shirt".


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

It is great in single track I have been racking up the miles on the poto and the bike handles is very well!!!


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Nice!
The poto is next on the list! Love that place!


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Negotiator50 said:


> Simple decision. Get the 9.8 and buy an after market bluto. I've seen them for $450. Problem solved. If you get the 9 now, you are gonna want to upgrade to carbon frame later on. Avoid all that and get the 9.8 and slap a bluto on there if its in your budget.
> 
> Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk


I had been agonizing between a 9, 9.6 and 9.8. My LBS has a 9.8 and I rode it. Yeah, it was more than I wanted to spend. But it needs zero modifications for what I want to do with it (other than tire studs, but that applies to any bike). Looking at all that, it was only a few hundred dollars more.

So I picked it up yesterday and rode it today. Wallet pain yesterday, glad I did it today and I'll be glad in the future since this is such a great bike. The bike is quick, rides like a dream and is silly light. I'll put a suspension fork on it in the spring - don't need or want it for the winter here in Minnesota for snow riding.

The 9.8 is probably everything I would have ever wanted in a fatbike and adding the fork would just not be a big deal and worth it.

J.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

I test rode and bought the Farley 7 today. I plan to use it to commute in the winter and ride the mountain bike trails.

I rode it 20 miles today, 8 of which were on a MBT with fast sections, big elevation changes (slow uphills, fast downhills with burms etc) and some tight twisty woods sections with obstacles.

*Keep in mind I don't even have a true mountain bike (Trek 8.4 Dual Sport) and have never ridden a fat bike. I do however like to go fast and hold my own in the trails. *

Initial thoughts from a complete newbie.......

LBS put 20 PSI in the tires which I realize is too much but that's my starting point.

1. Sorry but I hate the color. To me it's worse in person than the pictures. The blue lettering is hideous. I am a function over fashion guy so it's irrelevant. YMMV

2. The tires are comically big. (again, new guy here)

3. It feels very, very light. Lighter than my Trek 8.4 DS. I was very surprised. The front end is very light and comes up WAY easier than my DS.

4. When pedal speed gets high the bike starts bouncing badly. Very annoying. Shift into a higher gear and it goes away. I got used to shifting at the right point and was able to come close to eliminating it. The tires hum very loudly.

5. I was worried about the 11 speed drive train but there is plenty of gear on top and the bottom for anything I've ridden. Never longed for a different gear. The tall gear is plenty and I never needed 1st or 2nd. Maybe I'll need the super low gears for snow?

6. It feels slower on pavement but according to Strava it's not significantly slower than my DS. Perfectly acceptable for my 5 mile commute.

7. I took it easy in the mountain bike trails to get a feel for the handling etc. * It is VERY easy to ride.* I don't know what "self steer" is but this thing turns very easily and it's point and shoot in the tight sections. It's extremely stable over bumps and obstacles. To my surprise when I checked my Strava I set 5 personal records. It felt slower but clearly is not.

8. Better clearance Clarence. I did not measure but places my front chain ring or pedals would hit on logs etc on the DS the fatty cleared easily.

9. Handle bars seem unnecessarily wide. It steers so easy I think the wide bars are overkill. The trails I ride have some very tight sections and the bars barely fit through the trees. Anyone cut their bars down?

Overall it's more money than I wanted to spend on a bike but I can see a lot of smiles in my future. 

Jeff_G


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Great review Jeff, thanks for taking the time to type it.
Yes 20psi was way, WAY too much.


----------



## Jmf003 (Nov 23, 2011)

Rob Schafer said:


> I'm torn. I've got $200 down on a Farley 7. The more I think I'd like the 9.6 carbon and weight savings. However I'd prefer the 26x5 tire/wheel combination the 7 offers for Michigan. Idk


I bought a set of DT Swiss BR2250s to go with my Farley 9.6. Planning to use the 27.5 Hodags on dirt and 26 Dillinger 5s on snow.


----------



## MrMattyT (Oct 27, 2015)

Jmf003 said:


> I bought a set of DT Swiss BR2250s to go with my Farley 9.6. Planning to use the 27.5 Hodags on dirt and 26 Dillinger 5s on snow.


I have a set on order for my 9.6.... looks like they won't be here until late November. Did you convert your BR2250's to tubeless yet - if so - how'd it go?


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Quick updates:

1. I love the fact that you can downshift three gears with one lever throw. 

2. I have a 900 foot drop over 1/2 mile on my commute and found the high gear lacking. But, I was doing over 25 mph so good enough....

3. Riding Fat added less than 15% to my commute time.


----------



## Jmf003 (Nov 23, 2011)

MrMattyT said:


> I have a set on order for my 9.6.... looks like they won't be here until late November. Did you convert your BR2250's to tubeless yet - if so - how'd it go?


Oops. Answered the wrong question. Yes, I did set up the BR2250s tubeless. Used the DT Swiss rim strips and wide Stans tape. Getting the tire beads to catch was a lot of work. Other than that it was straight forward.

The Jackalopes, on the other hand, were super easy. Wheels came pre-taped. Rim design made it very easy to remount the tires and set the bead.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Hi,

Does anyone know of a way of fitting 165mm crank arms to a Farley 5 (2016)?

I'm guessing I would need a new crank & bottom bracket, but am very confused about what specs I should be looking at, so guidance on this would also be very useful.

Would like to stay with a 2x setup.

Thanks 

(P.S. I'm UK based, if it matters)


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

Buy new cranks... Go to your lbs and tell them you need new 165mm cranks installed. Pick your choice of what's available, SRAM, race face.. Your shop will install them and you ride off into the sunset.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

crohnsy said:


> Buy new cranks...


Thanks 

I was hoping that someone might know which manufacturer / series of cranks might be compatible, as I have not managed to find anything so far, and it seems there are a few pitfalls to avoid.

Ideally the R-F Rides (that are fitted now) would be available in 165mm, so it would just be a case of swapping the chainrings over and slotting the new cranks into the BB, but they aren't available in 165mm. Neither are NEXT SL, TURBINE CINCH, TURBINE or AEFFECT.

RESPOND & CHESTER are available in 165mm, but I can't find any with a 190mm spindle. They are listed with a 100mm BB on the R-F website, but I think this is with a 170mm spindle, and am unsure of achieving the correct q factor (am I right in looking for ~220mm?)

SRAM don't seem to do 165mm cranks other than for the DH stuff which isn't available in fat bike widths (as far as I can tell).

I couldn't find anything by E*thirteen or Truvativ, either.

I'm not expacting anyone to do my research for me, but if they happened to *know*, I'd be grateful.

It seems I'm looking for something that doesn't exist, though


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

*ti can be done*









My lbs figured out how to fit the NEXT SL on my F5 Frame.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

FT251 said:


> View attachment 1025058
> 
> 
> My lbs figured out how to fit the NEXT SL on my F5 Frame.


Excited ! I've my Farley 5 due into my LBS in a week. Can't wait! For once I'm actually hoping for the worst winter ever this year in the UK. Are you running the stock fork on this or going for something different? I may look at getting a carbon one at some point and just wondering what to go for. Considering one of the On-One (Planet X) carbon forks.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

FT251 said:


> My lbs figured out how to fit the NEXT SL on my F5 Frame.


Very nice! Are those 165mm long cranks? I couldn't find them listed on the Race Face site.

(Then there's the small matter of budget - Ideally I'm looking to keep under £150/ $200  )


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

170 mm


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

FT251 said:


> 170 mm


Ahh, thanks.

There are quite a few options for 170 (which I could, sort of, live with), but my knees much prefer 165.


----------



## midschool22 (Apr 13, 2012)

Got my 7 today.


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

I'm in love with my 7, added a bluto and it swallows everything. Looking fwd to next year, if evolution is on my side, and Trek release fs fatbikes, then I will replace my fuel, even though i love that one as well


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

Jeff_G said:


> 7. I took it easy in the mountain bike trails to get a feel for the handling etc. * It is VERY easy to ride.* I don't know what "self steer" is but this thing turns very easily and it's point and shoot in the tight sections. It's extremely stable over bumps and obstacles. To my surprise when I checked my Strava I set 5 personal records. It felt slower but clearly is not.


You'll generally feel more self steer the lower the tyre pressure so if you're at 20psi you'll definitely not be experiencing that  The tyre pressure can make quite a difference on a fat bike particularly a rigid but there's no one answer to what is best as it's what suits, where you're riding etc. so you just need to experiment and see what works for you. I initially tried to avoid pressures that gave me self steer but a fat bike veteran dropped my pressures quite a bit lower where there was noticeable self steer but I've just got used to it and find the bike works better for me in terms of the smoothness of the ride (wrists were having a hard time initially) and amount of grip.

I've been surprised how fast my Farley 6 can be, I find it's well suited to natural rooty trails as the fat bike can power over the roots with ease and through the mud whereas on the Fuel I'd be losing a bit of speed to the suspension and traction. On downhill sections I have so much more confidence with the huge tyres that I've been able to go faster than my full suspension bike and even on some uphill sections thanks to being able to put power down and still get grip where the FS would be slipping.

Aside from anything else, I just find it a lot of fun to ride as there's sections I've always dreaded on the FS bike as they were loose and slippy but I look forward to them on the fat bike. Also now coming into winter instead of dreading the slippy dark nights, I'm looking forward to keeping on going as I know the Farley will make easy work of the tough conditions. Plus it's nice to know when the bike is caked in mud and grime that there's no fancy suspension and bearings under there I'm trashing.

Hope you get as much fun out of your Farley as I've had mine, definitely been one of my best purchases.

John


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

Tnx, John.
I have the same feeling and experience with some of the crux parts ive been riding with both fs and my farley. It's a fantastic bike, no doubt!
On bumpy trails, as in parts that on a fs floats, low tire pressure helps, but not enough imo. The bluto saves my wrists (lifelong damage), so that part of the old body is taken care of 
Have positive exp on lowering the reverb (an inch or so) on my fs on those bumpy parts, so im counting the bux the get me one for my 7... 
Looking fwd to the winter, bumpy snow mobile tracks


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

Btw, i replaced the stem. From 70mm to 50 (from slash). Quicker response


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

So whats the consensus on the new Jackelope 27.5 wheels with tubeless Hodags? How you guys liking them? how do they feel? Looks like i found me a set of takes offs for my F5 build. I've been real happy with the 26 inch Jackelopes currently on my F6 set up tubeless with hodags. Will be converting those to fatter tires for winter and use the 27.5 x 3.8's for summer along with a bluto fork. I was going to just use a faster 26 inch tire but feel the 27.5 wheels may be a bit nicer with the newer frame. Thanks for the feedback!


----------



## burtjason (Oct 31, 2015)

TrekStache said:


> View attachment 1024054
> 
> 
> Will take more pictures on my ride tomorrow


SO.......what were your impressions?


----------



## Crit Rat (Mar 13, 2008)

That Farley 7 purple sure is sweet looking. Is it just as good in person?

I'm liking the geometry of the Farley. It looks to be a nice mix of modern trail geometry applied to a fat bike. Are people feeling like the sizing is relatively normal? I ask because I ride a 21.5 or XL Slash 9 but am thinking a 19.5 Farley would be the right size for me.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I am 5' 11" and have the 19. I like it!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

5"12, have the 19.
I do not like it, i LOVE it!


----------



## Crit Rat (Mar 13, 2008)

So potentially similar Trek sizing. I'm 6'1" but with a wingspan of 6'3.5" hence straddling the size line of 19.5 to 21.5 or L to XL.

For a fat bike I like having every bit of stand over I can get. I'm going to go do some test riding today.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Bring your wallet! You will be making a purchase!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Crit Rat (Mar 13, 2008)

Ha, yes I am prepared.

Also have wife approval. She started this quest when she got her sweet Borealis Yampa making me realize that my 2011 Pugsley needed some serious upgrades or just a bike upgrade to maintain some parity.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> It is great in single track I have been racking up the miles on the poto and the bike handles is very well!!!


I'm thinking about running the Poto tomorrow.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Rode the poto last two days it is in great condition!!!


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

How many lbs of tire pressure are you running?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

I am at about 10-12 but i am a little larger than average


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

Quick update on my Farley 5 1x conversion (simple 30t chainring): very easy once I sourced an ISIS crank removal tool at the LBS in order to get the inner ring off. The 30x 11-36 is fine for my local trails, where I essentially need the lower six cogs. Next will be an XT 11-42 cassette once the ring/cogs & chain need replacing. I also fitted a Zee shifter, which has de-cluttered the bars a lot and gotten rid of those useless shifter windows on the OEM Deore kit. This has left the front derailleur internal cable routing ports open, which I've temporarily taped up. Possibly routing the rear brake line through there with a 90 degree banjo in the future to clean up the cabling further.

The best benefits have been a weight saving of ~ 400 g as per the digital kitchen scales but the removal of the front derailleur has allowed full use of the Stranglehold dropouts in their foremost position. Wow: this has really made the bike a_ lot _more playful and an absolute ball in singletrack! The rear end really follows the front a lot more closely, it's easiler to pop a wheelie over small bumps and the rear tracks up & over steps far more easily when climbing. For the cost of a single chainring (OK, and twenty bucks for a tool for my workshop), the handling has been improved a hundred per cent, as well as knocking almost a pound off and tidying up the bars. Highly recommended for all F5 riders :thumbsup:


----------



## bosker (Oct 30, 2015)

*New Owner*

First off let me apologize for the long post.

I am a new member to this forum and a new owner of a Trek Farley 9.6 that I just got last Thursday. I have been reading this thread in anticipation of learning more about these new Farley's and when folks were starting to receive them. I order mine back in Sept. and was told it would most likely arrive mid November sometime. Well I was definitely pleasantly surprised to get it a couple of weeks early.

This is my first foretay into fat bikes, however during my trip to Maine last year I got a chance to ride a fatboy around for a bit and was instantly hooked. Having a hard tail mountain bike for years I was really wanting to try out a full suspension bike. I ended up purchasing a Salsa Horsetheif for my oldest son and decided I was an expert rider after several weeks out on it only to crash pretty badly in a rock garden on a local trail. Lesson learned, I realized my body isn't as young as my mind thought.

I wanted something with the bigger wheels after riding a 29" bike. I knew how well bigger wheels roll over obstacles, and in my mind I am like wider tires would also help in this regard. So here we are, my first fat bike, and to be honest after only riding it for the past three days I can tell it will become my favorite. I purchased the Trek due to its somewhat future proofing of a system, that and a carbon frame to help keep weight down.

Right out of the store my bike is weighing in at 29lbs, which is higher than I expected, however I don't have it setup tubeless just yet, thats coming. I also am swapping out the amazingly wide handlebars with a carbon riser bar along with carbon seat post, lighter saddle and new pedals. Hopefully without too much more money I can bring it down to 27lbs or better. Cost wise I wonder if just going for the 9.8 would of been better - I guess I will find out as I make upgrades. Thanks to this thread I have gotten a lot of ideas on what parts to look at for weight savings, especially the Xpedo Spry pedals Amazon.com : Xpedo Spry Platform Pedal White : Bike Pedals : Sports & Outdoors, which appear to be some of the lightest platforms that exist.

I know my time on a fat bike has been short to date, however I must say that imo these are the perfect bikes for us older folks. Being in my forties, and realizing that I can't jump a bike like I used to - let me rephrase that, I can't land a bike like I used to  - these bikes provide the fun and stability to tackle any terrain, and damn it, they just look cool doing it!

Thanks for reading, and I will continue to post updates as I get more mileage in.


----------



## rain100 (Sep 12, 2014)

If you're looking into the Farley 5, and wanting a 1x drivetrain, I would suggest taking another look at the 7. The Farley 7 and above all have a much narrower 1x specific crank setup that decreases q factor by 20mm. This is huge!

The other upgrades that the 7 has over the 5 (carbon fork, 11 speed rear sram setup, DB3 brakes) are nice, but the fact that it has a narrower q factor is reason enough to look past the 5.

That being said, you could swap out the stock 5 crank for a race face Aeffect crankset to get the same q factor of the 7.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

*Thats my plan!*


----------



## TrekStache (Oct 23, 2015)

*Trail*









This bike is a blast. I was happy to have flats today on the trails, was going a little to quick and needed to put a foot down quick. If anyone is not sure about the 9, you will not be disappointed.


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

I dropped by a LBS today and the 7 is very nice in person. Thing is that it's grossly overpriced for what you're going to get (not sure about US pricing but here in Canada it's $2900. You can get a Felt DD10 w/ Bluto for $500 more and the Bluto here retails for $800+)

Time to consider other brands


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> I am at about 10-12 but i am a little larger than average


I ran the poto with 10 lbs front and rear.
I cut over 20 min off of my best time with my 29er!

Can't get the grin off of my face knowing this is going to be my year round bike!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> I ran the poto with 10 lbs front and rear.
> I cut over 20 min off of my best time with my 29er!
> 
> Can't get the grin off of my face knowing this is going to be my year round bike!
> ...


you had a great weather day for being out there!! Nice job on the time drop.. it is a great bike..


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

KantoBoy said:


> I dropped by a LBS today and the 7 is very nice in person. Thing is that it's grossly overpriced for what you're going to get (not sure about US pricing but here in Canada it's $2900. You can get a Felt DD10 w/ Bluto for $500 more and the Bluto here retails for $800+)
> 
> Time to consider other brands


$2200 here. By far one of the best, most versatile 
offerings by any company right now. Given the
upgrades over the 5, the 5 just didn't make
sense for me. It just needed different brakes.
I purchased a set of 2016 XT brakes with IT rotors.
Now it will ready to rock.


----------



## Crit Rat (Mar 13, 2008)

US MSRP is $2399. Pretty good deal for us even at sticker.

I didn't get to ride one yet. Maybe tomorrow. House maintenance has been taking my time minus one great ride on the trail bike.


----------



## peibrandon (Mar 18, 2005)

It's worth it to look around for a deal on a 7 in Canada. I just ordered one from my LBS for $2500 CAD (~$1900 USD). Can hardly wait!


----------



## crankpuller (Feb 27, 2004)

KantoBoy said:


> I dropped by a LBS today and the 7 is very nice in person. Thing is that it's grossly overpriced for what you're going to get (not sure about US pricing but here in Canada it's $2900. You can get a Felt DD10 w/ Bluto for $500 more and the Bluto here retails for $800+)
> 
> Time to consider other brands


Norco sasquatch 6.2 rigid is basically the same spec for $600 cheaper than the farley 7. Should be arriving in shops any minute


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Well, my Farley 7 got delivered last week while on vacation, went in to build it today, and I sliced my finger open while spinning the wheel/rotor to tune the brakes. Pretty bad, cut all the way through my finger nail into my nail bed, and was bleeding through my finger nail. 

So I never got to finish it, its just sitting in my living room sad 85% assembled. And now I cant even ride it this week and take advantage of super nice weather I have here.


----------



## drmayer (Apr 19, 2007)

Threw a bluto on my 7. Fun so far, no real trail riding yet though.


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

drmayer said:


> View attachment 1025970
> 
> 
> Threw a bluto on my 7. Fun so far, no real trail riding yet though.


Looks great. I'll be up to the same shenanigans tomorrow if my new crown race arrives.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

drmayer said:


> View attachment 1025970
> 
> 
> Threw a bluto on my 7. Fun so far, no real trail riding yet though.


Tubeless? Also how wide are the barbagazi in reality? Thanks


----------



## headwind (Sep 30, 2004)

ZenkiS14 said:


> Well, my Farley 7 got delivered last week while on vacation, went in to build it today, and I sliced my finger open while spinning the wheel/rotor to tune the brakes. Pretty bad, cut all the way through my finger nail into my nail bed, and was bleeding through my finger nail.
> 
> So I never got to finish it, its just sitting in my living room sad 85% assembled. And now I cant even ride it this week and take advantage of super nice weather I have here.


My God. I did the same thing tuning my Unit.
I feel your pain brother!


----------



## headwind (Sep 30, 2004)

drmayer said:


> View attachment 1025970
> 
> 
> Threw a bluto on my 7. Fun so far, no real trail riding yet though.


I just brought home my 7 yesterday.
Anything special needed to install a Bluto?
Do I need a new headset?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

No, just the crown race which can be switched 
from the stock fork.


----------



## headwind (Sep 30, 2004)

Gambit21 said:


> No, just the crown race which can be switched
> from the stock fork.


Thanks.
I will probably just buy one to install on the Bluto.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

FT251 said:


> Also how wide are the barbagazi in reality?


Mine measured about 115mm / 4.5" across the knobs on the 80mm Mulefuts @ ~~10PSI. Just added this to the 'True tire size' thread.

(Set up tubeless very easily, too, but only saved 200g / wheel after adding 160cc of Stan's)


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

Misterg said:


> Mine measured about 115mm / 4.5" across the knobs on the 80mm Mulefuts @ ~~10PSI. Just added this to the 'True tire size' thread.
> 
> (Set up tubeless very easily, too, but only saved 200g / wheel after adding 160cc of Stan's)


Less than that if you carry a spare tube for emergencies:madman:


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

The stock tubes were ~440g , so I can go tubeless, and carry a spare tube without any weight penalty.  More importantly, I can ride my local trails without worrying about thorn punctures! :thumbsup:


----------



## drmayer (Apr 19, 2007)

No tubless yet - waiting for rim tape to come in.


----------



## Jmf003 (Nov 23, 2011)

FT251 said:


> So whats the consensus on the new Jackelope 27.5 wheels with tubeless Hodags? How you guys liking them? how do they feel?....


I have a handful of rides on the Jackalope + Hodags but today was the first day I could get to an advanced trail: Torn Shirt at Michigan's Brighton Recreation Area. It's tight and twisty, a sand/gravel surface with a lot of roots and some rocks, the climbs are short but steep with little chance to carry momentum from the previous downhill.

I ran the tires tubeless with 12 psi rear and 10 psi front, which seems to be a good pressure for me (235 lbs) on dirt.

The Hodags really performed well on that trail. Nice balance of good traction (on climbs, in corners and on roots) and good straight line speed (rolling resistance seemed low). I found the handling to be very predictable and railed through every corner.

The tires also did well over the numerous rooty sections of trail. I have a 9.6, so my only suspension was the tires and my arms and legs, and had no issues managing the bumps at speed.

The only down-side was the wheel-tire weight: I could feel it on every climb but on a more flowy trail (e.g. Brighton Rec's Murray Lake) it was much less of an issue.

I'm real happy with the setup and will definitely keep it and use it as my my dirt trail setup.

HTH....


----------



## Alain2 (Jan 19, 2015)

Last winter I was riding a blizzard with 4.8" tires. I'm currently waiting for my Farley 9.8, but also geting nervous about riding 3.8 tire in the Canadian winter. I think I should not see much difference in tired. I'm 225lbs with gear so it may not be the fault of the tires if I dig.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

drmayer said:


> No tubless yet - waiting for rim tape to come in.


FWIW: I used 4" wide duct tape. (Actually "100mm wide Scapa 3122 Heavy Duty Waterproof Tape").


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Jmf003 said:


> I have a handful of rides on the Jackalope + Hodags but today was the first day I could get to an advanced trail: Torn Shirt at Michigan's Brighton Recreation Area. It's tight and twisty, a sand/gravel surface with a lot of roots and some rocks, the climbs are short but steep with little chance to carry momentum from the previous downhill.
> 
> I ran the tires tubeless with 12 psi rear and 10 psi front, which seems to be a good pressure for me (235 lbs) on dirt.
> 
> ...


I live close to Brighton Rec, but haven't had a chance to get my 9.8 out there yet. Maybe tomorrow during my lunch break!

My lunch rides consist of either Island Lake or Brighton.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Alain2 said:


> Last winter I was riding a blizzard with 4.8" tires. I'm currently waiting for my Farley 9.8, but also geting nervous about riding 3.8 tire in the Canadian winter. I think I should not see much difference in tired. I'm 225lbs with gear so it may not be the fault of the tires if I dig.


I can almost guarantee some manufacturer will come out with a 4.8x27.5 before too long.

However, they might not fit on the front if the bike has a Bluto.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jmf003 (Nov 23, 2011)

LunchRider said:


> I live close to Brighton Rec, but haven't had a chance to get my 9.8 out there yet. Maybe tomorrow during my lunch break!
> 
> My lunch rides consist of either Island Lake or Brighton.


That's a good lunch ride! Especially on your new 9.8!!

There are a couple of local fat bike rides coming up: the Global Fat Bike Day ride at Island Lake (https://www.facebook.com/events/590292107780115/) and the Abominable Snow Ride at Poto (2015 Abominable Snowman Ride - December 13th at Noon! | Poto MBA). Come on out with your 9.8!


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Thanks! I had no idea! I will make it a point to be there!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jmf003 (Nov 23, 2011)

LunchRider said:


> Thanks! I had no idea! I will make it a point to be there!
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Great! I'll be at both events. If I don't manage to say hi to you first feel free to send a hello my way if you happen to see me. I'll be the gray haired Clydesdale wearing a Wheels in Motion jersey.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Cool, I will be the only one dressed in a goretex duck hunting jacket and pants!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## PBL450 (Nov 3, 2015)

Hi all, just joined and just started Fat Bike riding. Farley 5. I'm a road guy who decided I need to have an open relationship with my skinny tires. Did the first few rides this weekend, woods Saturday beach Sunday. Loving it so far!


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Sweet bike!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Hope to have my "super 5" this Saturday, loving he colors more and more.


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

New Bike Day! Trek Farley 7. 30.3lbs with pedals and tubes, goal weight is 27.xxlbs.


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

I have been riding the 27.5's for a month or so now. For the last week or two it has been in the snow in single track trails. I don't really have a good point of reference, since this is my first fat bike, but I am really impressed with them. I am tubeless, and ran 7 in the back and in the front today in 2" or so of new snow, and it hooked up good, but I felt like to could go lower on pressure. The picture is not a good example since I just went through some mud and water before this, but the tires shed the snow really well and it had great traction. The only place it did not work really well was sidehilling.


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

Yup, but the situation here is complicated by higher prices and lower availability. I'm a plodding returning rider, so weight savings aren't my primary concern (unless you count reducing the 5kg spare tyre around my own middle). Back-country reliability, simplicty and fun factor are!



rain100 said:


> If you're looking into the Farley 5, and wanting a 1x drivetrain, I would suggest taking another look at the 7. The Farley 7 and above all have a much narrower 1x specific crank setup that decreases q factor by 20mm. This is huge!
> 
> The other upgrades that the 7 has over the 5 (carbon fork, 11 speed rear sram setup, DB3 brakes) are nice, but the fact that it has a narrower q factor is reason enough to look past the 5.
> 
> That being said, you could swap out the stock 5 crank for a race face Aeffect crankset to get the same q factor of the 7.


...and I don't want a purple rain ride


----------



## Alain2 (Jan 19, 2015)

I love the purple Farley 7, perfect choice of colour. I would love my 9.8 to be purple.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I would love my 7 to be grey and orange - the purple is growing on me more and more though.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

ok it HAS arrived! Collecting tomorrow morning. Excited but literally have no room to store it. I haven't seen it yet but in the photo the paint job looks much better than I expected. I was worried it was going to be a bit glossy but it looks more dull metallic.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Has anyone converted the Wampa 27.5 TLR to a tubeless setup yet?

I was wondering if you need tape or is it simply ready for a valve stem and some sealant after removing the tube.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

LunchRider said:


> Has anyone converted the Wampa 27.5 TLR to a tubeless setup yet?
> 
> I was wondering if you need tape or is it simply ready for a valve stem and some sealant after removing the tube.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


It is my understanding that they include a TLR kit that has the tubless valves and rim tape with the bike.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Really? I did not receive any accessories except a front derailleur bracket.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

I received all that with my Jackelope wheels. IDK why they wouldn't include it with the Wampa's. Ask your dealer, or send Trek a question from their web site. They answer pretty quick.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I will report my findings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

bswedorski said:


> Picked up a Farley 9.8 last week. Absolutely love it. It's my first Fat Bike althought I've demoed a few.
> 
> I did manage to generate a slow leak in the front tire after the first ride. Due to there being ZERO replacement tubes in stock anywhere, it is now set up tubeless front and back.
> 
> ...


I have a 9.8 and was wondering what was needed to go tubeless. did you need rim strips?


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

With the 9.8 the only things you need are sealant and valve stems. The wheels are already taped. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

That is sweet! Thanks!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

LunchRider said:


> I have a 9.8 and was wondering what was needed to go tubeless. did you need rim strips?


All I needed to go tubeless was valves and sealant. The Wampas are pre taped. I scored some sweet Roval alloy black tubeless valves for the conversion. 4oz of Stans in each wheel and just for the sake of trying used a floor pump to go tubeless on one wheel. Very easy tubeless!


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

Wait til you guys slap some 29+ wheels and tires on the Farley. Completely changes the bike. I built a set of nexties on dt big rides slapped some 120tpi knards on them tubeless and transformed the fast fatty into a rocket ship.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

silver2ks4 said:


> Wait til you guys slap some 29+ wheels and tires on the Farley. Completely changes the bike.


NO SHTI!- slap some road bike wheels on there and it will transform it even more!


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

Gambit21 said:


> NO SHTI!- slap some road bike wheels on there and it will transform it even more!


Got a set of Maxxis Hookworms for those days.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

jrogersAK said:


> I have been riding the 27.5's for a month or so now. For the last week or two it has been in the snow in single track trails. I don't really have a good point of reference, since this is my first fat bike, but I am really impressed with them. I am tubeless, and ran 7 in the back and in the front today in 2" or so of new snow, and it hooked up good, but I felt like to could go lower on pressure. The picture is not a good example since I just went through some mud and water before this, but the tires shed the snow really well and it had great traction. The only place it did not work really well was sidehilling.


Nice crank!


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Anyone use the Sun Ringle 78mm tape yet on the MuleFuts? I just picked up some up, gonna try to get them setup this weekend.

Also, whats the bare minimum amount of sealant you can safely get away with in these things?


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

So just picked up my Farley 5 this morning and it is beautiful and ridiculous all at once. The width of the tires is INSANE. I took it for a very quick spin out of the shop and it moves pretty quick and feels lighter than the 15kg or so it is supposed to be. Actually feels very responsive. Tires came inflated from the factory and haven't checked pressure but I imagine it is quite high. Stuck some old blue Nukeproof Neutron flat pedals on it which match the blue highlights on the paint job perfectly. Now begins my whole learning curve with owning a Fatty. Think I need to get a couple of spare tubes but from what I read I can get away with a standard 3.5-3.8" MTB tube that will hopefully be considerably lighter than the stock ones it ships with. May chuck a 70mm stem on it and then look at going tubeless once I figure out how to do it. Any tips guys for a n00b with a new Farley 5? What pressures you recommend for riding hardpack trails and rooty technical (and muddy) single track. I weight about 86kg. cheers


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I am new to the fatty scene as well. So far I have tried 10/10 and 10 rear/8 front. I liked them both. It all boils down to experimenting. I'm going to convert to tubeless tomorrow, not for the weight factor, but in preparation for some snow biking.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Teton29er (Jul 31, 2011)

Congrats cr3anmachin3 on the new bike!!!

Do some searching for the mulefut tubeless and you will find what you need. I'd suggest going with the tape made for this rim--78mm sunringle tape sold by universal cycles.

As far as pressure, get a low reading pressure gauge and discover what works for you. On pavement, I use about 20. On nice hardpack or gravel maybe 15. On rough single track closer to 7-10. Basically use as much pressure as you can without the tires basketball bouncing over stuff. When the tires start bouncing, they eat up speed and you can loose traction.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Teton29er said:


> Congrats cr3anmachin3 on the new bike!!!
> 
> Do some searching for the mulefut tubeless and you will find what you need. I'd suggest going with the tape made for this rim--78mm sunringle tape sold by universal cycles.
> 
> As far as pressure, get a low reading pressure gauge and discover what works for you. On pavement, I use about 20. On nice hardpack or gravel maybe 15. On rough single track closer to 7-10. Basically use as much pressure as you can without the tires basketball bouncing over stuff. When the tires start bouncing, they eat up speed and you can loose traction.


Cheers! Many thanks for the advice. Yes got a nice little Topeak guage for measuring pressures. Yeah have read a few things about people using various duct tapes for sealing rims as the sunringle tape can be expensive. I will need to get the MASSIVE tires off and have a look. I assume the stuff I see bulging out is the tube pressing against the rim strip, so you will still get this amazing effect if you go tubeless. I sort of did A LOT of research on Fat Bikes before getting the Farley 5 but not so much research on the price of rim tape (ouch!), tubes (double ouch!) and tires (mega-ouch!!!). I cannot believe how massive those 4.7 Barbegazi tires are....they are HUGE! I may try a narrower tire come the summer but these will definitely rock throughout the winter!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

ZenkiS14 said:


> Anyone use the Sun Ringle 78mm tape yet on the MuleFuts? I just picked up some up, gonna try to get them setup this weekend.
> 
> Also, whats the bare minimum amount of sealant you can safely get away with in these things?


Try a search - there's an entire thread on this subject.
Hint 'Mulefut 80 SL'


----------



## mikeetheviking (Jan 27, 2015)

Can some veteran bike/wheel ****s please chime in on the benefits/pro's and con's of the new 27.5 x 3.8 platform?

I am curious where these may have advantages or disadvantages vs regular 4 and 5 in fat tires and also 27.5plus sizes and 29+ sizes.

What are your overall opinions on this new platform? What is it doing for you?

Does anyone see this platform eliminating other platforms?

I agree with another member here, I would have also liked to see this tire put on a 60mm rim. (for tire profile reasons, and ability to run even narrower 3.5 and 3.0 sizes)
However, I can see where Trek was headed with this in creating a fast "fatbike"

I am really liking the fact that Trek has gone where no man has gone before.

I am also curious how well the 27 x 3.8 would look and feel on a WTB scraper rim.

This platform looks like a great 3rd option in the fatbike summer wheelset group!

Can anyone see this being used as a 365 day a year platform?

I am also curious if this would make a kick ass 365 days a year dirt platform.

Please enlighten my mind.


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

My goal is to to run one set of rims year round on my farley 5, I am hearing that Nextie is coming out with a 65mm 27.5 I could run 3.2 to 4.0 but not sure about 4 plus.

Thoughts ?


----------



## mikeetheviking (Jan 27, 2015)

If Nextie comes out w/ a 65mm 27.5 rim you would be just fine running all 4.0-3.2 maybe even 3.0


----------



## mikeetheviking (Jan 27, 2015)

Aquamogal, will you be riding in snow?


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

I don't think there are any frames that can handle a tire larger than 4 inches on a 27.5 wheel. ...at least yet. 

Did some measuring today at the LBS:
26 X 3.8 is 29.0 in diameter
26 x 4.7 is 29.25 in diameter
27.5 X 3.8 is 29.3 in diameter
29.0 x 3.0 is 30.25 in diameter.


----------



## mikeetheviking (Jan 27, 2015)

props to the moderator for editing my post in style......that just made my day


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

mikeetheviking said:


> Can some veteran bike/wheel ****s please chime in on the benefits/pro's and con's of the new 27.5 x 3.8 platform?
> 
> I am curious where these may have advantages or disadvantages vs regular 4 and 5 in fat tires and also 27.5plus sizes and 29+ sizes.
> 
> ...


http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/27-5x4-whos-excited-whos-not-979984.html

My advice- if you must go 27.5" fat, save your money until it at least has some market support aside from Trek.

Otherwise buy a Farley 7


----------



## mikeetheviking (Jan 27, 2015)

Are they really coming out with 27.5 x 4.0? or is the 27.5 x 3.8 hodag what we ended up with?

Kinda like When everyone was excited for surly to release the 29 x 2.7 dirt wizard and then it came out in 3.0.....


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Am I the only one that's wants bigger rubber? Bud and Lou on 100's has plenty of clearance. Let's see a 27.5 x 5

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dEOS (May 25, 2009)

mikeetheviking said:


> Can some veteran bike/wheel ****s please chime in on the benefits/pro's and con's of the new 27.5 x 3.8 platform?
> 
> I am curious where these may have advantages or disadvantages vs regular 4 and 5 in fat tires and also 27.5plus sizes and 29+ sizes.
> 
> ...


I am curious about this also.
Currently looking at Trek Stache or Trek Farley with no way to test (no test bike in shops, nor test center/truck whatever you have in the US).

Feedback from people who rode bigfats/650B+/29 and this new format is invaluable to new buyers. Especially with feedback on a variety of terrain (Is it much better than 26x4(.6) on road for example). Looking forward to it.


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

I specifically bought the 7 because I wanted a FATBike. And a 27.5x3.5 is too close to a 29+ tire, and I already have a few trail bikes. I wanted a dedicated snow bike, so thats why I bought the 7 with 26x4.7 tires.


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

Natedeezy said:


> Am I the only one that's wants bigger rubber? Bud and Lou on 100's has plenty of clearance. Let's see a 27.5 x 5
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I will definitely want a wider option down the road for the 27.5. it could definitely go wider but I do understand that wider means taller also. How tall do you think a 27.5x5 would be? 32 inch or more?


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Natedeezy said:


> Am I the only one that's wants bigger rubber? Bud and Lou on 100's has plenty of clearance. Let's see a 27.5 x 5
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Can you move the tire back in the drop outs? If not my concern would be clearance where the chainstay narrows if you went with a bigger diameter version of that tire. If you could move it back it should fit.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

sort of related to above posts. Has anyone got an online guide or howto for the Stranglehold dropouts. I'm just wondering what's involved when I have my first flat and have to take rear wheel off. Is it simple enough?

I only just got my new Farley 5 home the other night. I struggled to get it in the car, struggled to get it up the stairs into the apartment and struggled to find room for it. My girlfriend is now just calling it THE TRACTOR and every time we walk into the kitchen where it stored we walk out laughing again. The size of the tires on this bike are RIDICULOUS! Away this weekend so first ride will have to wait until next week :-(


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

Literally unthread the through axle, slide it out and remove the wheel. Fork and rear wheel operate the same way *for Farley 7 and up. Farley 5 has front qr


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

crohnsy said:


> Literally unthread the through axle, slide it out and remove the wheel. Fork and rear wheel operate the same way.


ok that simple then! I already took the front wheel off which is just a standard QR but when I had a look at the rear it looked a bit different with a screw that goes in to the back. This is my first time with thru axles so I'm now thinking maybe I took the front wheel off the incorrect way :-/ I took it off like a regular QR but now realize you are supposed to slide the axle out,,,doh! Hope I haven't damaged anything.


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> ok that simple then! I already took the front wheel off which is just a standard QR but when I had a look at the rear it looked a bit different with a screw that goes in to the back. This is my first time with thru axles so I'm now thinking maybe I took the front wheel off the incorrect way :-/ I took it off like a regular QR but now realize you are supposed to slide the axle out,,,doh! Hope I haven't damaged anything.


I misread you have a Farley 5' thought I read 7. You are correct the front is standard qr, the rear is through axle. all the hardware on the rear dropouts is to adjust the chainstays length. You might want to get your shop to show you how to adjust those for you.


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

Yes riding snow, will keep the 80mm rims and the stock 4.7 to see how they do


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

crohnsy said:


> I misread you have a Farley 5' thought I read 7. You are correct the front is standard qr, the rear is through axle. all the hardware on the rear dropouts is to adjust the chainstays length. You might want to get your shop to show you how to adjust those for you.


ah ok phew! Yeah I thought it was a standard QR on front but never had a thru axle before so wasn't sure. Yes I don't plan on adjusting the chainstays on rear at all yet but if I understand you correctly it's just a case of sliding the thru axle out, and I don't mess with the wheel position at all. Yes, will ask the guy in my LBS about the Stranglehold stuff. He's a Trek dealer but I imagine this stuff is as new to him as it is to me. thanks


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

Also anyone know if the 29+ tire on stache would fit on new farleys ?
Just wondered, it may make more sense just to get 1600 new stache


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

They should but will not fit the 9, due to the Bluto. But the 5,7, 9.6 and 9.8 should all work.


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

FT251 said:


> They should but will not fit the 9, due to the Bluto.


This is malarkey, I have not yet seen a 29+ setup that does not fit in the bluto, I've run dually rim/knard, northpaw rim/chupacabra/knard/fatbnimble and hugo rim/fatbnimble/chupacabra no problems


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> ...if I understand you correctly it's just a case of sliding the thru axle out, and I don't mess with the wheel position at all...


Correct.

The axle holders are clamped to the drop-out slots by those big (20mm) hex nuts that you see either side of the bike...










...and they won't move unless you slacken the big hex nuts (and the allen bolt on the disc caliper mount).










In case you don't know, you un-screw the axle to remove it. The handle won't clear the frame at first, but it is spring-loaded, so you can pull the handle out, rotate it clear of the frame (it doesn't turn the axle when you pull it out), then carry on for another ~3/4 turn before you need to do the same again.

The inside of the axle holders is shaped to hold the wheel hub, so you can just drop the wheel into place and slide the axle in without having to try and hold everything in alignment. (Not like a motorbike!)



















At least in the UK, there are plastic spacers in the drop-outs which need to be removed before you can slide the wheel forwards. They are held behind the big hex nuts which need to be completely undone to do this (the axle holder / adjuster will fall out of the frame if you let it when you do this). Also beware that what looks like a machined slot under the head of the sliding bolt on the brake mount is, in fact, a thin, oval washer.

There is *just* enough clearance to be able to slide the wheel all the way forwards without it hitting the front derailleur with the stock Barbegazi tyres on my Farley 5, but I haven't tried it in mud since I adjusted the dropouts.

HTH


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Thanks man! This is useful info. I feel like I've bought a monster! It scares me to even look at it. Can't wait to get out on it though. The funny thing is I live in Ireland, if lucky we get 1-2 weeks of snow at most. I took it out of the LBS for a quick ride & I think a couple people almost crashed their cars looking at it. It really is a head-turner! LOL


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> I feel like I've bought a monster! ... It really is a head-turner! LOL


I know what you mean! 

I'm in Wales, so we get about as much snow as you. I rode mine into work last week, and as word spread, pretty much the whole factory visited the bike racks to see the alien craft that had landed.


----------



## dEOS (May 25, 2009)

aquamogal said:


> Also anyone know if the 29+ tire on stache would fit on new farleys ?
> Just wondered, it may make more sense just to get 1600 new stache


http://danosmodernlife.com/2015/09/28/stache-vs-farley-29-plus/

They fit.


----------



## JaMMu76 (Jan 19, 2008)

Love my 9.6


----------



## drmayer (Apr 19, 2007)

Set up the mulefut rims on my 7 last night with orange seal tape and stans sealant. I initially wasn't impressed with how the tape installed. It didn't seems to stick to the rim/rim strip real well and was difficult to keep wrinkle free. 

They seemed to seal up quickly though and held pressure overnight so we'll see how they do. Lbs recommended the orange seal tape over the sun ringle tape.


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

Anybody mounted an X-Fusion Hilo Strate to a Farley? That's probably up next for me.

I finally got the Bluto on my F7 two days ago. Of course, it's been raining ever since.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I have not, but would be very interested in your findings.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

My checking account says if I'm good, maybe next month!


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Paochow said:


> Can you move the tire back in the drop outs? If not my concern would be clearance where the chainstay narrows if you went with a bigger diameter version of that tire. If you could move it back it should fit.


They are all the way back in the drops in that pic, I'll have to throw the 100's back on and actually measure.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## IvertA (Jul 6, 2015)

Maybe there is another thread for this specific subject, but ill have a go anyway. Ive now followed Tubeless Fatbike Conversion Update | Cycles In Life for setting my mule fut on my farley7 tubeless.
Ive replaced the original rim tape with a map printed on tyvek, and added tesa tape, not scotch (local shop did not have scotch). The tesa tape won't stick to the rim properly, maybe i washed with the wrong soap?
Anyway, ive now put the tube back in, added 30psi of air and will wait for tomorrow to see if ill try with some stans sealant and no tubes...

Anyone set it up tubeless using another method? Different tape?


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

You need the tape to stick to the rim for it to work - I wouldn't waste your Stans if the tape hasn't stuck.

One of my rims had a LOT of tyre soap on it that would stop anything sticking to it. I took the rim strip off and washed both the rim and the rim strip with water / dish soap. I gave the rims a wipe with methylated spirit (denatured alcohol) before re-fitting the rim strips and taping.

I used one wrap of 100mm wide Scapa 3122 Heavy Duty Waterproof Duct Tape over the top of the original rim strip. No problems so far.


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

KantoBoy said:


> I dropped by a LBS today and the 7 is very nice in person. Thing is that it's grossly overpriced for what you're going to get (not sure about US pricing but here in Canada it's $2900. You can get a Felt DD10 w/ Bluto for $500 more and the Bluto here retails for $800+)
> 
> Time to consider other brands


Welp, someone here is swallowing his words...

NOW AN OWNER OF A 7! HAHAHA:band:

Can't wait to ride this tomorrow. It was a roller coaster 3 weeks for me but ended up with a FB that I actually like.

If anyone's on the fence on getting a 7: the color is killer in person unless you really hate Purple.

*I have a question:* this is my first bike with thru axles and the guy at the shop placed a business card in between the brake pads when he removed the front wheel - is this a way to make sure the brake pads don't rub when you put the thru axle back in? I took the business card out and slid the thru axle and it looks like the rotor is rubbing (can you smell the roadie in me? yes we're barbarians that still use QR levers).


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

KantoBoy said:


> NOW AN OWNER OF A 7!


Congratulations! 



> ...the guy at the shop placed a business card in between the brake pads when he removed the front wheel - is this a way to make sure the brake pads don't rub when you put the thru axle back in?


Most likely it's just to stop the pads closing up if you caught the brake lever with the wheel out - normal practice for hydraulic discs.



> I took the business card out and slid the thru axle and it looks like the rotor is rubbing...


*Looks* like the rotor is rubbing, or *is* actually rubbing?

If it's just a case that it looks close, and perhaps you can hear something as you spin the wheel, but it doesn't slow the wheel down, then just go and ride - it will bed itself in (IME).

If it is actually rubbing enough to noticeably slow the wheel, then investigate further - it will probably rub if you haven't tightened the axle, but be cautious in case there is something amiss.


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

Misterg said:


> Congratulations!
> 
> Most likely it's just to stop the pads closing up if you caught the brake lever with the wheel out - normal practice for hydraulic discs.
> 
> ...


It is rubbing, but it doesn't stop the wheel from spinning. The sound is noticeable though.

When I took it for a test spin last night I didn't notice any rub. When I put the front wheel back on (I suppose that business card needs to be removed? I did remove it but I don't think the rotor is centered when I put the thru axle back)

Help a monkey out here!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Congrats on ur purchase! I just bought a Farley 5 a few days ago. Yeah remove the card. Sounds like just a small bit of rotor rub & nothing to worry about. Generally it's only a problem if the disc is bent or it's slowing the wheel down. Usually with hydraulics when u reseat the wheel & close the QR u pump the brake a half dozen times & then hold for 30 seconds or so & the pads settle to the correct position. If ur transporting the bike a lot in back of car & removing front wheel then ask ur LBS if he has any spare Avid/SRAM or Shimano brake spacers. I use them a bit but easy to lose. Cheap solution is to stick a bunched up cloth between brake lever & grip so the lever can't compress accidentally.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

*My new build*









It's a F5 frame, all custom with XT 8000 drive, brakes, Next crank, Jackelope wheels, Makwa fork, Thompson stem, Easton carbon bars and lizard skin grips. XT 8000 brakes and rotors. 27.8 LBS with the Barbi tires on it.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Why didn't you just start with a frame?


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

I did!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Sweet!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

some quick photos of my new Farley 5 now with pedals on. Have not ridden yet so need to adjust seat height and a few other things. It's a total BEAST.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

anyone suggest a cheap/light tube that would do for the Bontrager 4.8 tires pictured above? I've read that most people use Spesh 2.4 to 2.7 non-DH tubes but not sure how well these will work. Not ready to go tubeless just yet. Will be going tubeless eventually but also want to carry a spare. thanks


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> anyone suggest a cheap/light tube that would do for the Bontrager 4.8 tires pictured above? I've read that most people use Spesh 2.4 to 2.7 non-DH tubes but not sure how well these will work. Not ready to go tubeless just yet. Will be going tubeless eventually but also want to carry a spare. thanks


Suck it up and go tubeless ASAP. Best thing you can do. Then if you want to carry a spare carry one of your old tubes..


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

LOL I kind of expected someone was gonna say that. It's in the cards but never done it b4 so don't want to screw it up.


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

Get your LBS to convert it to tubeless for for you. I just had them do mine as part of the bike delivery.


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> LOL I kind of expected someone was gonna say that. It's in the cards but never done it b4 so don't want to screw it up.


I did mine successfully - if it wasn't stupid simple, it wouldn't have happened. And there are plenty of folks here that will be happy to lend advice if you want to give it a go.

Seriously, the biggest battle is getting the bead to break. So by the time you pull out the stock tubes, you're almost halfway done with the conversion - clean the rim inside, wrap it with tape, install the tubeless valve, reinstall the tire, add some sealant. I didn't even mess with the rim strips on mine. Helps to have a compressor to get the tire seated at first, but some have done it with a hand pump.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I am waiting for UPS to to bring me my valves and sealant right now!
I am going to convert mine tonight!


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Got my 7 stetup with Tubeless today, pretty painless, most difficult was removing the tires.

Used the SUN specific rim tape. 4oz of Orange sealant per tire. 

Ended up shedding just over 1lb on the whole bike. Bike is now 29.17lbs with tires.

My goal is to get it to 27.x . I have Guide R brakes, and Rhythm Pro Carbon bars coming for it this week.

Waiting on availability of carbon seatpost still.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Lowest hanging fruit weight savings-wise would be cranks,
not that the stock cranks are heavy. You'll cut about a pound 
though with NextSL cranks. Carbon bars and post won't do
much for you.


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Yea, I just like the bend and shape of them more. Have them on all my trail bikes.

Cranks would probably be next...but they are so $$ and I dont get nearly as good of a deal on them.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

crohnsy said:


> Suck it up and go tubeless ASAP. Best thing you can do. Then if you want to carry a spare carry one of your old tubes..


Exactly what I did. Haven't had any issues with tubeless and it shaved 2lbs off my Farley 5.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

I am pretty new to biking technology so any help would be appreciated. It pains me because this bike cost more than every bike I ever owned combined but I may have to modify my Farley 7. 

When I first rode it on a test drive (pavement) I was surprised by how wide the bars were. I assumed it would make sense once I hit the MTB trails and I would need the leverage. 

I have 150 miles on it now with 50 being in my favorite MTB trails. I don't think the bars should be that wide, seems unnecessary. I also run a mirror (love it for commuting) that sticks out another 3/4 inch and there are sections of the trail I have to almost stop to avoid hitting narrowly spaced trees. 

1. Will I want the wider bars when the snow flies?
2. Should I cut down the current bars?
3. New bars? If so, suggestions? 

Thanks,

Jeff_G

"At least I'm enjoying the ride"


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> I am pretty new to biking technology so any help would be appreciated. It pains me because this bike cost more than every bike I ever owned combined but I may have to modify my Farley 7.
> 
> When I first rode it on a test drive (pavement) I was surprised by how wide the bars were. I assumed it would make sense once I hit the MTB trails and I would need the leverage.
> 
> ...


Hi Jeff. Not often you hear of people wanting to go down a bar size these days. As someone who only ran up to 700mm until I just got my Farley 5 (last week) I would say stick with it for a while. I found as my riding got more technical and tackling steeper stuff I wanted wider bars. I haven't ridden in deep snow much (if ever!...we get 2 weeks max if we are lucky) but you may find you will need that extra leverage in the snow. Here's what I would do:

1. Will I want the wider bars when the snow flies? 
Probably. Don't get rid of them
2. Should I cut down the current bars? 
I wouldn't as once it's gone...it's gone. Buy a spare set and keep your others. They are cheap.
3. New bars? If so, suggestions? 
I've been a fan of these things here: Truvativ Hussefelt Comp Riser Bars | Chain Reaction Cycles I just wouldn't deviate too much from the rise/backsweep of your current setup unless it is really uncomfortable.

On my commuter and XC bikes i run 660 and 680mm. They may not inspire confidence on DH sections but they don't snag wing mirrors or trees half as much. I just think given the size of the wheels on the Farley you may want that leverage on the snow...but as I say I am 1 week into this Fat Bike thing


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

moshock said:


> Exactly what I did. Haven't had any issues with tubeless and it shaved 2lbs off my Farley 5.


yeah giving it a go. Been to TWO LBS's and neither have much experience setting tubeless up but can sell me stans sealant and valve stems. Might as well give it a go myself. More worried about my first puncture with tubes and trying to get tire of the rim for the first time :-/


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Regarding the Stranglehold rear dropouts:



Misterg said:


> There is *just* enough clearance to be able to slide the wheel all the way forwards without it hitting the front derailleur with the stock Barbegazi tyres on my Farley 5.


I need to qualify that by saying that *with 5 PSI in the tyre* there is *just* enough clearance...

Front derailleur on large chainring (wheel all the way forwards with 5PSI in the tyre):










As above, but front derailleur on small chainring - less clearance:










While very close, this actiually worked OK on a really dirty, muddy ride.

BUT I pumped the back tire up to 8PSI today, as I was finding 5 PSI a bit draggy, and it started catching the front derailleur cable screw 

Just a gentle buzz initially, getting louder when I pedalled hard.

As a compromise, I have come back 5 turns on the adjusters from full forwards which puts the axle at about 60% of the way towards the front of the slots.

...So, there isn't enough clearance, really.


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

ZenkiS14 said:


> Got my 7 stetup with Tubeless today, pretty painless, most difficult was removing the tires.
> 
> Used the SUN specific rim tape. 4oz of Orange sealant per tire.
> 
> ...


I am down to 27.2lbs on my Farley 9.6, but that is already switched to a Next SL carbon crank and changing from DB3 brakes to Guide Ultimate. I think the big savings would be in light carbon wheels, but I may still do a different seat, post and bars first.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Interesting, I am at 27.8 lbs on my Farley 5 frame with NEXt crank, jack elope 26' wheels with Barbagazi tubeless tires, all XT components. My bigger tirs probably weigh .5 lb more than you so we are very close with my Alum frame.


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

I assume you are including pedals. I am, but mine are the 45 North Helva which are pretty light as well. Did you change your bars and seatpost, or are they stock. I would be interested to see how the frame weights compare. For a tire weight comparison, I took my front off, and for the wheel, tire, and brake disk, it weighed 2950g. This is set up tubeless, but by LBS did it, so I am not sure how they did it.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Easton EC70 carbon riser bars and Kent Erkison titanium seat post. Thomson stem. XT 8000 brakes, rotors, cassette, derailleur and shifter and Salsa Makwa carbon fork..


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

The inner roadie in me wants to cut and slam the stem down. I'm fairly flexible and can go on the drops on my crit races. I don't know if I should do it. 

I've already ordered some KCNC bar grips since I absolutely find the stock very thin for my liking.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

here's the real reason to get a Farley. Found this printed beneath the top tube. Brilliant!


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I noticed that yesterday while converting to tubeless! Love my fatty!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Hmmm.... now I gotta go out to the bike rack and look!


----------



## NRP (Sep 8, 2015)

I got a chance to ride a Specialized Fat Boy at my LBS, and I was laughing my butt off riding a fat bike for the first time. (A Remedy 9 is my main mtn bike). I am now thinking about getting a fatty, although not sure where id ride it (I'm in the central valley in Northern California). 

Question: Is it worth getting a Farley with the Rockshox fork, or is rigid carbon fork preferable due to the reduced weight and tire size? What are your opinions on this?


----------



## grendalfly (Nov 18, 2009)

Has anyone with a 9.8 pushed the sliders forward with the stock Wampa and Hodags?

I also want to say that the Front brake cable routing on the the Carbon fork is genius. I am a big fan of clean cockpit cables and this really solves the problem of the S curve in front cable lines nicely.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

grendalfly said:


> Has anyone with a 9.8 pushed the sliders forward with the stock Wampa and Hodags?
> 
> I also want to say that the Front brake cable routing on the the Carbon fork is genius. I am a big fan of clean cockpit cables and this really solves the problem of the S curve in front cable lines nicely.


Yes i have pushed my wheel all the way forward on my 9.8 with the stock wheels and tires!! what do you want to know?


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

grendalfly said:


> Has anyone with a 9.8 pushed the sliders forward with the stock Wampa and Hodags?
> 
> I also want to say that the Front brake cable routing on the the Carbon fork is genius. I am a big fan of clean cockpit cables and this really solves the problem of the S curve in front cable lines nicely.


Can you post a pic with the routing. Mine looks as though it could have used a "haircut" before installation.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

Misterg said:


> Regarding the Stranglehold rear dropouts:
> 
> I need to qualify that by saying that *with 5 PSI in the tyre* there is *just* enough clearance...
> 
> ...


'Zactly what I found, thus progressing quickly & cheaply to a 1x conversion on my 5.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

New guy question. What benefit do I get pushing the rear wheel forward?


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

I find it much more trail friendly and playful with the much shorter chain stays. I did the same thing with my Stache!! i assume some may not like it that way and depending on what you are looking for, but that is why i got it was to have many options and hopefully be my only MNT/ATB bike..


----------



## grendalfly (Nov 18, 2009)

tadraper said:


> Yes i have pushed my wheel all the way forward on my 9.8 with the stock wheels and tires!! what do you want to know?


How is the clearance? Enough for snow/mud?


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> New guy question. What benefit do I get pushing the rear wheel forward?


Good question. Basically by decreasing the wheelbase (distance between the front and rear wheels) slightly, you trade some stability and comfort for increased manoeverability. This makes the bike quicker to turn and easier to wheelie (ie. move your centre of gravity back behind the rear axle), often described as making the bike more "playful".


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

grendalfly said:


> How is the clearance? Enough for snow/mud?


Yes i think so but we are a ways from having snow in SE Michigan.

Here is a photo with the wheel all the way forward.
:thumbsup:


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Fat Dan said:


> 'Zactly what I found, thus progressing quickly & cheaply to a 1x conversion on my 5.


My legs need the 22T ring!



Jeff_G said:


> New guy question. What benefit do I get pushing the rear wheel forward?


I did it for maximum wheelie-ability (I'm intent on learning!), but also noticed that the bike fell into turns a little easier. (I have already fitted a shorter stem, which also helps).

The down-side is that sliding the wheel forwards makes the front more 'lively' on climbs, but this is something I think I can manage.

Oh, and I like fiddling with stuff...


----------



## nickowatts (Nov 12, 2015)

Any tall riders out there have time on the 21.5"? I'm 6'7" and considering the 9.6.

Thanks! Nick


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

Really interested in a Farley 7. Heading down to my LBS to ride a 5 and see how I like it.


----------



## NRP (Sep 8, 2015)

Tincup69,
What don't you like about your Fat Boy?


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

NRP said:


> Tincup69,
> What don't you like about your Fat Boy?


I love my Fatboy and will be keeping it most likely. I'm just looking for another fat bike to tool around with.


----------



## NRP (Sep 8, 2015)

Cool. Let me know how the Farley compares to your Fatboy. I too am considering both.


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

Will do, hopefully I can ride the Farley 5 tomorrow.


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

Misterg said:


> My legs need the 22T ring!
> 
> I did it for maximum wheelie-ability (I'm intent on learning!), but also noticed that the bike fell into turns a little easier. (I have already fitted a shorter stem, which also helps).
> 
> ...


My legs will need a 42t on the back come Winter! Although the front does become lighter with the rear wheel adjusted forward, the phenomenal traction at the rear wheel lets you move your weight forward more readily to balance.


----------



## Ftchmup (Jul 6, 2015)

Tincup69 said:


> Really interested in a Farley 7. Heading down to my LBS to ride a 5 and see how I like it.


Great choice, 1x drive train, good group set and a ball to ride!!!


----------



## rain100 (Sep 12, 2014)

nickowatts said:


> Any tall riders out there have time on the 21.5"? I'm 6'7" and considering the 9.6.
> 
> Thanks! Nick


I would definitely try before you buy if possible. I'm 6'3" and it feels like it fits me perfectly. The Farley is pretty close, geometry wise, with the Stache, with each Farley size having less stack and reach. I know really tall people have had complaints with how the XL stache fits.


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

NRP said:


> I got a chance to ride a Specialized Fat Boy at my LBS, and I was laughing my butt off riding a fat bike for the first time. (A Remedy 9 is my main mtn bike). I am now thinking about getting a fatty, although not sure where id ride it (I'm in the central valley in Northern California).
> 
> Question: Is it worth getting a Farley with the Rockshox fork, or is rigid carbon fork preferable due to the reduced weight and tire size? What are your opinions on this?


I also ride a Remedy 9.8 as my main squeeze, and I decided to get a Farley 7 because of the bang for buck, I'll be able to ride mine in the snow this season quite a bit, but even as an alternative trail bike its a lot of fun!


----------



## nickowatts (Nov 12, 2015)

rain100 said:


> I would definitely try before you buy if possible. I'm 6'3" and it feels like it fits me perfectly. The Farley is pretty close, geometry wise, with the Stache, with each Farley size having less stack and reach. I know really tall people have had complaints with how the XL stache fits.


Thank you! That helps.


----------



## ggkid (Oct 30, 2015)

About to make my first fat bike purchase so that I can keep my mountain bike exercise going this winter. I'm torn between getting a Farley 7 and putting a Bluto on it and getting a Farley 9 which has a Bluto and those 27.5 x 3.8 wheels. While my fat bike purchase is mainly for this upcoming winter, I've been told I'll want to ride it year round once I get it. I've ridden my friends fat bike that has a rigid aluminum fork and I didn't like it at all on the trails we ride. My gut is telling me to go with the Farley 9 but I'm thinking that will require an additional 26" wheelset purchase to allow me to run wider tires for the winter. Which means more money after shelling out about $3000 on the Farley 9. I'm a heavier rider (270lbs) and I just want to keep moving and having fun. (FYI, I'm down 90lbs from where I was this time last year.) I'm currently riding my two month old Trek X-Caliber 9 and I've had issues with the free hub failing and the bb developing play and being noisy as of late. Still waiting on repairs. Looking to the experts here for advice on which to choose. Also, looking to hear from heavier riders on durability of the Farley line. Thanks in advance for any words of wisdom you might have for me. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Teton29er (Jul 31, 2011)

HI GGkid, 
I really like my 27.5 x 4 on my 9.6. I think they have some small advantages for single track riding, though others have the opinion they are no different at all. They have worked well in some snow riding as well, though I'm happy to have a 26x5 setup now that the snow is deeper.

In your situation, I'd probably steer you to the farley 7. It comes with a nice high volume tire to use in the winter and you will more choices for summer time tires. You could buy studded tires if you like in the winter. 

It will definitely be nice to have two bikes to choose from in the summer too--one can be down with mechanical issues and you will still be riding.


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

ggkid said:


> About to make my first fat bike purchase so that I can keep my mountain bike exercise going this winter. I'm torn between getting a Farley 7 and putting a Bluto on it and getting a Farley 9 which has a Bluto and those 27.5 x 3.8 wheels. While my fat bike purchase is mainly for this upcoming winter, I've been told I'll want to ride it year round once I get it. I've ridden my friends fat bike that has a rigid aluminum fork and I didn't like it at all on the trails we ride. My gut is telling me to go with the Farley 9 but I'm thinking that will require an additional 26" wheelset purchase to allow me to run wider tires for the winter. Which means more money after shelling out about $3000 on the Farley 9. I'm a heavier rider (270lbs) and I just want to keep moving and having fun. (FYI, I'm down 90lbs from where I was this time last year.) I'm currently riding my two month old Trek X-Caliber 9 and I've had issues with the free hub failing and the bb developing play and being noisy as of late. Still waiting on repairs. Looking to the experts here for advice on which to choose. Also, looking to hear from heavier riders on durability of the Farley line. Thanks in advance for any words of wisdom you might have for me.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I would go 7 and add the bluto if you want to ride it in summer, a lot of people run rigid in winter (potential fork seal issues on the bluto with cold weather, especially for heavy riders)

some background, I'm in the same boat as you, 250ish# most of the time, (congrats on the weight loss by the way!)

if you want to go ride all the time, go with the fattest knobbiest setup possible, yes, it's not the fastest but you will get to ride it more in bad snow conditions

no one here can really tell you what the 27.5x4 will do in snow yet, I do know that the hodag was not an amazing snow tire in 26x4 size and while 27.5x4 is a bigger contact patch, having no other tires available currently is an issue if your primary goal is snow riding to stay active over winter

I own a farley 9 as my summer fatty and it's already tucked away for winter, the 26x5 salsa is getting prepped and ready

The farley will not have any issues handling your weight


----------



## ggkid (Oct 30, 2015)

Thanks for the feedback Teton and Titan. It all makes sense and helps. My LBS has Farley 7's on the way so I'll test ride one when it arrives and go from there. They did not order any Farley 9's since they chose to stock the 9.6 and they just couldn't carry them all. Buying a 9 would've been a special order anyway so perhaps the 7 will be the right fit and something I'll be able to have sooner. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Yea, if you are buying for mostly winter use, go with the 7, that was my same dilemma, and I wanted the bigger tires off the start.


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

Good advice, I think. The F7 will get you through the winter as-is, and since you already have a summer bike, you won't need to invest in the Bluto immediately unless you wind up using the fattie more than the X-Caliber in the summer. Sort of the best of both worlds, getting the less expensive F7 now and having the time to upgrade it if you really want to. You can spend the winter shopping for a Bluto and find one reasonably, use the $$ saved to get the X-Caliber fixed - it's not like that bike is a bad choice to fall back on come summertime if necessary!


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

If you're going to spend the $$ upgrading to an aftermarket Bluto, why not just start with a F5? As a winter bike, you could use it to inherit any parts you upgrade on your summer bike (wheels & tires excepted, obviously).


----------



## ggkid (Oct 30, 2015)

Fat Dan said:


> If you're going to spend the $$ upgrading to an aftermarket Bluto, why not just start with a F5? As a winter bike, you could use it to inherit any parts you upgrade on your summer bike (wheels & tires excepted, obviously).


FD, the main reason I'm thinking the F7 over the F5 is the F7 comes with a carbon fork and the front wheel on the F7 is already a 150mm TA which I'll need for the Bluto. The F5 is only a 135mm hub and I didn't want to have to get a new hub/wheel or have to use some sort of adapter setup when I go Bluto. I had thought about that option initially though. Seemed to me having the correct sized front wheel along with the other upgrades that the F7 made more sense. I'm sure for people that are more mechanically inclined than me they might choose the F5 and build themselves a new front wheel. I rely on LBS for all my work so I'm looking at labor costs as well.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yep, 7 is good bang for the buck, and you might decide you don't need the Bluto.


----------



## lantos (Nov 13, 2015)

I too can not decide between F7 and F9.I noticed F9 has slightly different geometry than F7. Could it be that it is adjusted for different fork?


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

@ggkid @lantos Can I make it easy for you two?










*How can you not NEED this bike?
*
Like everyone said the only thing that would probably need upgrading is a Bluto if you're gonna do any technical stuff during the summer.

the 5 leaves something left to be desired (bigger tires, maybe 1x for some like me) and the 9 might be a bit of an overkill for some. I think the 7 is the sweet spot bike in the line.

Just swipe that card godamnit.

*this ad is brought to you by a F7 owner :thumbsup:


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

The 7 is the bike I'd buy. 26" wheels, 150mm front hub, a solid 1x drivetrain, and a carbon fork at a reasonable price. Best bike for the buck in the Farley lineup by far.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

KantoBoy said:


> the 7 is the sweet spot bike in the line.


Yep!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

KantoBoy said:


> Like everyone said the only thing that would probably need upgrading is a Bluto if you're gonna do any technical stuff during the summer.


I upgraded the brakes - 2016 XT with ICT rotors.
Rigid forks are fantastic for technical riding, better than suspension forks in some respects. Bluto for faster, rocky descents maybe. I'm up in the air still if I'm going to add one later. I'm waiting to see what else comes out in that suspension fork department.


----------



## MObiker (Feb 14, 2004)

I have a Farley 9 coming. I've never had a fatbike but a lot of my friends have them an no longer ride their 'skinny wheel' 29ers. Can't wait to try it.


----------



## Robg68 (Oct 27, 2013)

nickowatts said:


> Any tall riders out there have time on the 21.5"? I'm 6'7" and considering the 9.6.
> 
> Thanks! Nick


I'm 6'4" tall and ride a 21.5. It fits well. I installed a shorter stem and new bars with about 1.5" rise to them. My back doesn't like being to leaned over.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

KantoBoy said:


> @ggkid @lantos Can I make it easy for you two?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I just got a F5 and it comes with 4.7 Barbegazis which are exactly the same as the F7 (I think!). Granted it has an AL fork vs Carbon I think on the 7 and front QR VS TA on the 7. I thought about the 7 but it wasn't listed on the UK Trek site although my supplier could get it. I tend to do a lot more long touring rides so the 2 x 10 made sense to me. As a very first Fat Bike i was prepared to spend a little over £1000 but the 7, while a lovely bike, was just a bit to expensive for me. I do think it looks great though. Purple as Da Bomb.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Took my brand new 9.8 out for it's inaugural ride last night. Did some mileage on sand beaches in the dark with lights. Really impressed how well the 27.5x4's did over the sand. I bought this thing to ride all winter and I think that plan is going to work well.

J.


----------



## lantos (Nov 13, 2015)

Farley 9 and 7 frames are not the same. This is a response from Trek when I asked them about geometry: "Thanks for writing Trek. The Farely 9's biggest distinction is the Bluto fork. The Farley 7 has different headtube and seattube angles than the Farley 9, so putting a suspension fork on the 7 will make it more similar to the 9 but it won't be identical.Another key difference is that the Farley 9 comes with 27.5 x 3.8" tires. This should give it a bit of a racier feel and a slightly bigger contact patch.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

lantos said:


> Farley 9 and 7 frames are not the same. This is a response from Trek when I asked them about geometry: "Thanks for writing Trek. The Farely 9's biggest distinction is the Bluto fork. The Farley 7 has different headtube and seattube angles than the Farley 9, so putting a suspension fork on the 7 will make it more similar to the 9 but it won't be identical.Another key difference is that the Farley 9 comes with 27.5 x 3.8" tires. This should give it a bit of a racier feel and a slightly bigger contact patch.


Whether this came from Trek or not I highly doubt the frames are any different. Seems more likely the person from Trek is on crack.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lantos (Nov 13, 2015)

Why so hostile? Trek's website clearly shows different head angle. Don't you think suspension fork is longer that rigid fork and they had to adjust geometry slightly?


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

No hostility, the difference in geo is defiantly because of the Bluto. But I have to believe the frame is the same otherwise besides color. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## [TA] (Dec 3, 2008)

Sorry for the confusion. All '16 Farley frames (carbon and aluminum) have the same geometry. The seat angle, head angle, and reach differences are due to the difference in axle to race between the bluto and rigid fork. I'm sure our tech rep was referencing this. They mean well but don't always have all the answers ;-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

lantos said:


> Why so hostile? Trek's website clearly shows different head angle. Don't you think suspension fork is longer that rigid fork and they had to adjust geometry slightly?


If they had adjusted the geometry accordingly, the final angles would be the same.


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

Just rode the 5 at my LBS and it felt great. It just felt right, maybe even better then my Fatboy. I will be putting a deposit down on a 7 in the next few weeks.


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

KantoBoy said:


> @ggkid @lantos Can I make it easy for you two?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've seen many different shades of the 7's color, would this picture be closer to the actual color?


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

No pic I've seen has done the 7 justice and completely agree that it's the sweet spot....and I have a 9.8


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

Yep - it isn't an easy color to photograph accurately. I'm no fashion maven, but it isn't offensive to me.


----------



## Sevenz (Jul 17, 2009)

M.Hunt said:


> Yep - it isn't an easy color to photograph accurately. I'm no fashion maven, but it isn't offensive to me.


This is mine...I feel this pic represents the actual color pretty well...Sick Flat Purple...Best Color Ever


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Got some more parts tossed on my 7, so I'm SRAM Guide R brakes, Bontrager Rhythm Pro carbon bars, and tubeless, and I am 28.6 lbs with pedals, which isnt bad! I'll probably keep it that way, maybe change up seat/post, but I'm good with that weight for now.


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

ZenkiS14 said:


> Got some more parts tossed on my 7, so I'm SRAM Guide R brakes, Bontrager Rhythm Pro carbon bars, and tubeless, and I am 28.6 lbs with pedals, which isnt bad! I'll probably keep it that way, maybe change up seat/post, but I'm good with that weight for now.


What size is your 7?


----------



## Sevenz (Jul 17, 2009)

Tincup69 said:


> What size is your 7?


Mine is a Large...28# on bathroom scale with pedals. Set up all stock except I put the take offs from my Top Fuel on it(carbon bars, stem, post and saddle)...Also set up tubeless...


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Tincup69 said:


> What size is your 7?


Mine is 17.5"


----------



## Alain2 (Jan 19, 2015)

What tire pressure you guys run on the 27.5? I'm 225lbs and I think 8psi front and 10psi rear is good for me for summer. Will drop couple psi for winter.


----------



## Alain2 (Jan 19, 2015)

My 9.8 xlarge, less than 27lbs with clipless pedals.

Last year I had a Rocky Mountain blizzard with 26x4.7 tires. I found the 27.5 tires on this trek have stiffer sidewall because I run the same tire pressure so far and I don't hit the rims.


----------



## PBL450 (Nov 3, 2015)

Sevenz said:


> This is mine...I feel this pic represents the actual color pretty well...Sick Flat Purple...Best Color Ever


This is spot on. Having seen the 7 at the LBS. It is a somewhat muted purple. I absolutely LOVE the color. I went with the 5 for budget constraints... And I like the orange and black of the 5 a lot, but the color alone almost swayed me. The 1X too, but if I'm being honest, and I am the Cheshire Cat for better or worse, it was the color that had me flummoxed.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Alain2 said:


> View attachment 1029016
> 
> 
> My 9.8 xlarge, less than 27lbs with clipless pedals.
> ...


I weigh 187 and have tried ten in the rear and eight up front on single track without issue. I converted to tubeless and left them both at fifteen for a few days. I liked fifteen, but that was tooling around the wood, checking my trail cameras and swapping out my feeder battery, but it felt like I could roll over anything. Not sure I will leave them like that for my next run on the local trails.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

I weigh 193, I have been running 12 now for quite some time-several months in dirt, both on 3.8's and 4.7on 26 inch wheels. It seems to be my sweet spot FWIW.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

FT251 said:


> I weigh 193, I have been running 12 now for quite some time-several months in dirt, both on 3.8's and 4.7on 26 inch wheels. It seems to be my sweet spot FWIW.


Did you just have the 4.8 on 26 left over from another bike, or did you purchase them specifically for your Farley? Did you get a chance to ride in snow and feel the 3.8 was lacking?

I'm just curious, since I am waiting for my first snow in MI to see how the 3.8 on 27.5 will do. I have only seen one other review in snow from a person in AK.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

I had a farley 6, now I have a farley 5....although the 5 is just the fame and all custom parts, I took all the good stuff off the 6 and put it on the 5. I use jackelope wheels. I also have a set of jack elope 27.5's with hodags/bluto fork for dirt use. Bike is currently in "winter" mode with carbon fork.

3.8 on a 27.5 is different then on a 26. I ride a lot of frozen rivers in winter (MI) and wanted more float than the 3.8 x 26 provides. The extra diameter the 26 x 5 provides is helpful as well. I think yo will like the 27.5 x 3.8's although I have not ridden on them yet my self. I think they will be fast


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

So finally got my 19.5" Farley 5 out for a proper ride at the weekend. Did about 16 miles on mixture of fire road, beach, hardpack gravel, mucky & rooty natural and tarmac. Here's some of my first impressions:

Sizing - Feels and looks right, alongside my 19" Hardrock it looks slightly bigger. Possibly felt a little far forward on saddle but may be able to sort this with another stem or a setback seatpost. Could be my new Endura tights were sliding me forward a bit.
Weight - I think this bike is 15kg but feels VERY nimble and much less than that. Quick to get up to speed and holy crap....when you are moving it's next to unstoppable. Rolls VERY fast. My girlfriend could not believe I was easily keeping pace with her on the climbs.
Tyre pressure - so I think they came pre-inflated to 20psi. I dropped them to about 12 as I was doing a mixture of beach/mud/single track/gravel and tarmac. Thought that might be the best compromise. Was good fun on beach when I rode on solid partially wet sand couple of metres from the tide. Rolled like a demon on single track and gravel. Quite good on the muck but probably could have done with lowering psi a bit more there. As bike is fully rigid some sections were hard work on the arms. However, I can't remember having so much fun in muck & roots, rolling over things like angled roots I would have tried to avoid previously. Back end was sliding out loads probably due to my braking but it was so much fun just hitting everything.
Jumping - I tried a few small hops off kerbs and gratings. All was ok until I jumped off a raised manhole cover and on landing I don't know what happened. Think I landed hard on front tyre and it bounced me back up & hands came off bars and I landed on my face in the mud in a crumpled heap. May have been a slip off the manhole cover or the tyres bouncing me back. Need more work on this.
Punctures! - I had planned to do 26 miles but only got 15 done. Thorns At least 2 or 3 of them in front tyre. I had no spare tube with me and was reluctant to try and get tyre off rim in very cold & wet conditions so was able to get a ride home. Glad I did....getting the tyre off the rim took some work. Full weight (186kg) with 2 feet balancing and working my way round the bead on the tyre, then some hand pressure round the tyre. Easy after the first time, but had to patch tube THREE times. So what's the story with thorns? Do Fat Bikes puncture more easily. I may try and squirt some Slime into the tube if I can remove the valve core. I think I need to go tubeless ASAP. My girlfriend rode the same section (+10 more miles) on a 2.1" XC bike with Schwalbe BlackJacks on and not a single puncture.

All in I really enjoyed it. I can't believe how much fun it is. Slightly worried by the raft of punctures from thorns. I would welcome opinions on best solutions from other Farley owners...I would guess go tubeless ASAP. I'm kind of concerned that if I go tubeless and end up carrying a spare tube on trail...what happens if both tyres puncture? Do you carry some Stans sealant as well as a spare tube? 

Also you cannot beat the looks you get from some passers by. Some middle aged man walking literally had his eyes hanging out. I think he thought it was an electric motorbike or something. Dog walkers also seem to get extra-worried when they see you pass although I always pass slowly and cautiously.


----------



## Teton29er (Jul 31, 2011)

Glad you had a great first experience!
Yes, tubeless and don't be skimpy with the sealant. 

Sounds like some of your comments relate to riding a rigid bike as much as it being a fat bike. Since I came from riding rigid 29ers, the fat bike felt like full suspension. Classic advice for new rigid riders is to "hold on tight"-- strong hands and relax your arms. I also changed the grips to some thick foam style ones--the stock grips felt about as comfy as a few wraps of duct tape on a steel bar. 

Also, try moving your rear wheel all the way forward for short chainstay. This will lighten the front end, allow more rear braking on downs as well as increase agility to steer around stuff. You may also be able to drop a few pounds front PSI to mellow out the bouncing.

have fun!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Teton29er said:


> Glad you had a great first experience!
> Yes, tubeless and don't be skimpy with the sealant.
> 
> Sounds like some of your comments relate to riding a rigid bike as much as it being a fat bike. Since I came from riding rigid 29ers, the fat bike felt like full suspension. Classic advice for new rigid riders is to "hold on tight"-- strong hands and relax your arms. I also changed the grips to some thick foam style ones--the stock grips felt about as comfy as a few wraps of duct tape on a steel bar.
> ...


Yes thanks. Yeah I ride Hardtails a lot of haven't ridden something fully rigid other than road bikes with carbon forks. Yeah I will try and build up my jumping skill and maybe swap out the stock grips with some SDG Han Solos I have which are pretty grippy and comfy. In the meantime I think I will inject some Slime into the tubes until I can get all the stuff ready for tubeless setup.

If I move the rear wheel forward (need to check where it currently is and how to do this first) does it have any impact on the drivetrain/chain slack or is it neglible? Also I have 4.7 Barbegazis on this beast so not sure how much actual room I have to bring the rear wheel forward a touch.


----------



## Teton29er (Jul 31, 2011)

Should be no problem to move things all the way forward. I have D5'd on clownshoes and was pleased to still be able to move the rear max forward.

I had to adjust the rear D after the move though. In low gear, I had binding to the first pulley.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> ...getting the tyre off the rim took some work. Full weight (186kg) with 2 feet balancing and working my way round the bead on the tyre


*186Kg* :eekster: you're a big guy!

I was wondering how you were doing with getting the tyres off! FWIW: I found it easier to hold the wheel at a slight angle (about 30 degrees from flat) and concentrate all my weight (78kg) on one foot right next to the bead - sort of pulling the tyre away from the rim as much as trying to pull it across (difficult to describe!) at the same time holding the valve open to let out every last little bit of air.

Tubeless for thorns +1.

I had problems on my normal mountain bike around here - thorn punctures *every* ride. Tempting fate to say it, I know, but I haven't had a puncture for over a year since going tubeless (despite picking up plenty of thorns).

I did risk a couple of rides on the Farley while I waited for the stuff to arrive to convert to tubless, and got away with it. Last ride out, though, there was about a mile of freshly cut hawthorn / blackthorn hedge on both sides, with trash still on the road. I *know* that I picked up at least two large thorns (I pulled them out), but tubeless did its thing.



> I'm kind of concerned that if I go tubeless and end up carrying a spare tube on trail...what happens if both tyres puncture? Do you carry some Stans sealant as well as a spare tube?


I started out paranoid, and carried 2 spare tubes, but after a year, I just carry the one now. You also need a small pliers (Leatherman type thing) to pull all the old thorns out of the tyre before you can put the tube in (there will probably be dozens). The pliers will also come in handy to undo the tubeless valve. I have never carried sealant, as I'm assuming that I wouldn't be able to re seat the tyre out on the trail.

Thin tyres puncture easier, (the Rocket Rons on my other bike were pathetic!) and I guess that fat bike tyres are built fairly lightly (in the main) to try and keep the weight down. Our odds aren't helped by sweeping up 4.7" of the trail compared to 2.1" 

I posted above about how far forwards I found I could bring the rear wheel, with the stock tyres, without fouling the front derailleur (I think you saw). Teton29er's wide clownfoot rims would probably help clearance for the front derailleur since they will make the tyre wider but shorter - YMMV.


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

Teton29er said:


> Glad you had a great first experience!
> Yes, tubeless and don't be skimpy with the sealant.
> 
> Sounds like some of your comments relate to riding a rigid bike as much as it being a fat bike. Since I came from riding rigid 29ers, the fat bike felt like full suspension. Classic advice for new rigid riders is to "hold on tight"-- strong hands and relax your arms. I also changed the grips to some thick foam style ones--the stock grips felt about as comfy as a few wraps of duct tape on a steel bar.
> ...


+1: Went back to chunkier old-style Oury grips with mine also. Lizard Skins North Shores, ODI Rogues or even ESI silicon grips could also be thicker alternatives to consider.

You'll only be able to safely shift the Strangleholds forward to about halfway before your rear tyre starts to interfere with the front derailleur on the stock Farley 5. Requires a 20mm socket or spanner to loosen them after removing the through axle to access & remove the plastic tri-pointed plugs & backing off the disc mount allen bolt. This might be enough for you but any further forwards needs a 1x conversion (or smaller tyres): easily done with a RaceFace 30t chainring or similar but requires crank removal to accomplish.

Tubeless? An almost mandatory conversion it seems. I've also improved the action of my F5's stock Avid brakes by removing & gently chamfering the pads' leading edges with a file, then a tiny dab of copper grease on the back of the pads on reinstall. Enjoy!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Misterg said:


> *186Kg* :eekster: you're a big guy!
> 
> I was wondering how you were doing with getting the tyres off! FWIW: I found it easier to hold the wheel at a slight angle (about 30 degrees from flat) and concentrate all my weight (78kg) on one foot right next to the bead - sort of pulling the tyre away from the rim as much as trying to pull it across (difficult to describe!) at the same time holding the valve open to let out every last little bit of air.
> 
> ...


Typo on my part..86kg....LOL. Thanks for the additional info!


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

*I need some help here:
*
- Scratched my fork earlier (stupidly) on my Farley 7. Does Trek provide touch up paint?

I want to cry now.

- Did a proper ride in it last Saturday and like I thought the crank is long for my taste. I use a 165mm on my Road bike and the jump to 175mm is too long for me. *I'm thinking of getting a 165mm crank soon *but:

*What are my options $200-250>? 
*
I'm confused as to what I should get. I got the basics down like the BB compatibility, 1x, Q factor...but what actually is chainline? Anything else I should look out for when choosing?

TIA


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

Just put down my deposit on a Farley 7. They are all sold out as of now but expect to be able to fulfill orders by January 8th. Can't wait!


----------



## fatbikelover (Nov 17, 2015)

Anyone riding slammed forward stranglehold dropouts ? What is the ride sensation like ? Also, for a 1x11 setup are there any tricks in the process like rear derailleur adjustment or chainlink removal due to chain slack ?


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

fatbikelover said:


> Anyone riding slammed forward stranglehold dropouts ? What is the ride sensation like ? Also, for a 1x11 setup are there any tricks in the process like rear derailleur adjustment or chainlink removal due to chain slack ?


yes and it's awesome, personal opinion...

you will have to adjust the b-screw on the derailer, maybe take a link out of the chain, I think the derailer took up enough slack but it looked funny to me

I also shortened the cable housing from the bottom of the down tube to the rear, 1x11 got a little hung up with the extra bend in the cable and I was snapping the last cable tie while riding, other 16' farleys do not seem to have this, I think mine had excessively long cable housing


----------



## fatbikelover (Nov 17, 2015)

Great info, thanks ! I'll give it a try and hope I won't wheelie myself off the trail on a technical climb


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

KantoBoy said:


> ... the crank is long for my taste. I use a 165mm on my Road bike and the jump to 175mm is too long for me. *I'm thinking of getting a 165mm crank soon *but:
> 
> *What are my options $200-250>?
> *
> I'm confused as to what I should get. I got the basics down like the BB compatibility, 1x, Q factor...but what actually is chainline? Anything else I should look out for when choosing?


Good Luck! I would love to find some 165mm cranks to suit the Farley 5, but have had no luck so far at any price. 170mm is easy - the RaceFace Rides that are originally fitted are available in 170mm AFAIK.

I emailed RaceFace and they replied that they don't make a fat-bike spindle for any of their cranks that are available with 165mm arms. (Maybe if enough people ask... )

I can find loads of square taper cranks, but not a square taper BB adapter for the 120mm push fit BB shell (nor an ISIS or Octalink one).

I'm currently wondering if it might be possible to plug and re-drill the existing arms (I know metallurgy is against it), or maybe extend the axle on a set of 165mm cranks...

BTW: 'Chainline' is the distance from the centreline of the BB to the chainring(s) - the middle ring of 3X, centre of big/little 2X. For the current (2016) Farley, I believe it needs to be 76mm, but hopefully someone can confirm this.


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

Misterg said:


> Good Luck! I would love to find some 165mm cranks to suit the Farley 5, but have had no luck so far at any price. 170mm is easy - the RaceFace Rides that are originally fitted are available in 170mm AFAIK.
> 
> I emailed RaceFace and they replied that they don't make a fat-bike spindle for any of their cranks that are available with 165mm arms. (Maybe if enough people ask... )
> 
> ...


Is it the spindle length that's crucial here?

What are the options for 170? I don't want to fiddle around too much, I just need a straight swap (would love to have DM in case I want to swap between chainrings for regular riding and racing).


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

KantoBoy said:


> Is it the spindle length that's crucial here?
> 
> What are the options for 170? I don't want to fiddle around too much, I just need a straight swap (would love to have DM in case I want to swap between chainrings for regular riding and racing).


Yes, trying to find 165mm cranks with a 190mm spindle (or equivalent) is proving problematic!

As regards 170mm cranks, pretty much everything seems to be available in 170 as well as 175.

The chart below from RaceFace is quite good - Take your pickstick from the lines with the ~76mm chain line & 5" tyre clearance:

http://www.raceface.com/comp/pdf/FATBIKE-CRANK-CLEARANCES.pdf

I think you'd need to go up to a Cinch to get a DM ring, but I'm sure others have more experience of this. I'm strictly 2X or 3X


----------



## JaMMu76 (Jan 19, 2008)

Misterg said:


> Yes, trying to find 165mm cranks with a 190mm spindle (or equivalent) is proving problematic!
> 
> As regards 170mm cranks, pretty much everything seems to be available in 170 as well as 175.
> 
> ...


Surly Mr Whirly cranks with moonie spindle?
https://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=23775&category=3459
I had that 165 mm set on my old 190mm 9:zero:7


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

JaMMu76 said:


> Surly Mr Whirly cranks with moonie spindle?
> https://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=23775&category=3459
> I had that 165 mm set on my old 190mm 9:zero:7


Brilliant, thank you - at least I know it can be done now


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

JaMMu76 said:


> Surly Mr Whirly cranks with moonie spindle?
> https://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=23775&category=3459
> I had that 165 mm set on my old 190mm 9:zero:7


I went on the Surly website and it says SS is only available in 175, 180 arms lengths


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

Just got word they found a 7 at another shop and are shipping to my LBS. I should have it next week. 

Is everyone using the Mulefut tubeless kit to go tubeless?


----------



## SHowley2003 (Feb 21, 2008)

Tincup69 said:


> Just got word they found a 7 at another shop and are shipping to my LBS. I should have it next week.
> 
> Is everyone using the Mulefut tubeless kit to go tubeless?


Congrats. That's awesome news! I went tubeless w/ my F5. Used the Sun rim strip, tape and valves. I contacted Sun and they said I could use the stock rim strip but it was so oily that the tape would not stick.

I removed everything, cleaned the rim real well with 70% rubbing alcohol. Then I installed the rim strip. It's a tight fit so I screwed in the valves to anchor it in place as I stretched it over the rim. Tapping was the toughest part. Take your time anchoring it down and really apply strong even tension as you are taping the rim to ensure it is grabbing the rim appropriately (a truing stand would be ideal). I then spent a couple of minutes really ensuring I pressed the tape down. I did reinstall a tube, air it up to 20 PSI and let it sit overnight. I needed a compressor to finish the job. The tubeless conversion has worked flawlessly for a couple weeks now.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Tincup69 said:


> Is everyone using the Mulefut tubeless kit to go tubeless?


Everyone should be - that's all that matters.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

SHowley2003 said:


> Congrats. That's awesome news! I went tubeless w/ my F5. Used the Sun rim strip, tape and valves. I contacted Sun and they said I could use the stock rim strip but it was so oily that the tape would not stick.
> 
> I removed everything, cleaned the rim real well with 70% rubbing alcohol. Then I installed the rim strip. It's a tight fit so I screwed in the valves to anchor it in place as I stretched it over the rim. Tapping was the toughest part. Take your time anchoring it down and really apply strong even tension as you are taping the rim to ensure it is grabbing the rim appropriately (a truing stand would be ideal). I then spent a couple of minutes really ensuring I pressed the tape down. I did reinstall a tube, air it up to 20 PSI and let it sit overnight. I needed a compressor to finish the job. The tubeless conversion has worked flawlessly for a couple weeks now.


Ok I'm new to this whole tubeless thing but I want to have a bash at it. I have an F5 and now I've had the tyre off (due to a bunch of thorn punctures) I'm gonna give tubeless a go. I the meantime I think I'm gonna inject slime into the tubes to keep me protected. So I have a few points/questions for others that have converted tubeless on the F5

- As far as I know I need the following: 2 X Tubeless valve stems, Stans sealant (6 oz per tyre), Sunringle 78mm tape or equivalent.
- From your post above you obviously tried to stick the tape to the rim but had to clean it first. Have any others just kept the rim strip on and gave it a quick wipe down before applying tape?
- That Sunringle tape is expensive. I've managed to land my hands on a massive roll of MOD waterproof adhesive gaffer tape 100mm wide which can be torn down to around 80mm or so. I'm hoping this will do the job as I'm worried about pissing money up the wall botching using the Sunringle stuff. I assume not everyone is using the Sunringle stuff made specifically for Mulefuts?
- Slime - how much Slime would you inject into a Bontrager fat bike tube? Bottle suggests 4oz but I would guess 6oz per Fat Bike tube?
- Last one  Does Slime inside a tube degrade it quicker or prevent it from being folded down tight to carry as a spare?

Thanks all!
Slime first this weekend then tubeless once I have the gear.
P.S. I only have a track/foot pump and no air compressor. Many had success going tubeless using a track pump?


----------



## Alain2 (Jan 19, 2015)

I pinch flat the rear tire yesterday at 10psi. The carbon rim has no damage, but lesson learn.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Pinch flat is specific to running tubes correct? Tubeless takes away that risk?


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Jeff_G said:


> Pinch flat is specific to running tubes correct? Tubeless takes away that risk?


that is correct!!!


----------



## Alain2 (Jan 19, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> Pinch flat is specific to running tubes correct? Tubeless takes away that risk?


yes, but it indicates that the tire fully compressed between a rock and the rim and that means possible busted rim on a tubeless system.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> ..I've managed to land my hands on a massive roll of MOD waterproof adhesive gaffer tape 100mm wide which can be torn down to around 80mm or so.


IMHO: Don't try and tear it - slit it down as shown here: Tech Tuesday: Gorilla Tape Tubeless Conversion - Pinkbike (I think 80mm would be too narrow, btw).

Then like this: 




It's more difficult to keep it neat on the wide rim - the middle will probably get a few wrinkles due to the cut-outs, but that shouldn't matter (I'll try and post a picture of mine later).

You might want to look up 'ghetto inflater' if you don't have access to a compressor, but think you stand a decent chance of getting the stock tyres / rims to seat without - use plenty of very soapy water to lubricate the beads.

(Oh, and like I said, I took the rim strip off and washed the strip and the rim with washing-up liquid and water, then wiped them with meths before taping.)


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Anyone have a suggestion for a rear rack that mounts to stock bungs? I saw one online that you had to attach the bracket with rubber and clamps to the frame and one Surley that needed a new seatpost clamp to attach to. One was cheesy and one heavy duty but was $150. 

I need something solid but it does not need to hold three days of camping supplies.


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

How are the Avid DB3's on the 7? I run XT's on my other bikes and I'm wondering if I should just get a set and swap them out or just run the Avid's for a while if they aren't horrible.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Tincup69 said:


> How are the Avid DB3's on the 7? I run XT's on my other bikes and I'm wondering if I should just get a set and swap them out or just run the Avid's for a while if they aren't horrible.


I didn't think the Avids are bad and worth using them first, in wet weather they can squeal a bit but they stop good. The newer XT 8000 brakes are better and have more modulation and lock up less but depending on your intentions of what you need or expect from them they are fine.


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Tincup69 said:


> How are the Avid DB3's on the 7? I run XT's on my other bikes and I'm wondering if I should just get a set and swap them out or just run the Avid's for a while if they aren't horrible.


And theres the whole Shimano brakes not being great in the cold thing...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SHowley2003 (Feb 21, 2008)

I completed a 1x conversion on my F5 today. I went with a 30 tooth CR and plan on leaving the cassette as is until I have a chance to test it in the snow. I think this will be the perfect gearing range for me, but only miles on it will tell for sure.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

SHowley2003 said:


> I completed a 1x conversion on my F5 today. I went with a 30 tooth CR and plan on leaving the cassette as is until I have a chance to test it in the snow. I think this will be the perfect gearing range for me, but only miles on it will tell for sure.


That looks nice man!! :thumbsup:


----------



## SHowley2003 (Feb 21, 2008)

moshock said:


> That looks nice man!! :thumbsup:


Why thank you. In super pumped. My D-Hanger is severely bent so I'll have to take care of that tomorrow and get out in the trails Sunday to try it out.


----------



## sk1er18 (Jul 11, 2009)

Anyone know the hub specs on the F7? I want to lace in different hoops and need to size up the spokes. My ERD and spoke hole offset is less than the Mulfuts so I know i'll have to go shorter.


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

I just noticed they didn't quote the Mulefuts anymore as the wheelset on the website. They recently updated as well:

http://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/bikes/mountain/trail/farley/farley-7/p/1064000-2016

although they still have it on the stock photos of the bike. do I smell some cost cutting on the next batch?


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

KantoBoy said:


> I just noticed they didn't quote the Mulefuts anymore as the wheelset on the website. They recently updated as well:
> 
> Farley 7 | Farley | Trail | Mountain | Bikes
> 
> although they still have it on the stock photos of the bike. do I smell some cost cutting on the next batch?


I noticed that last night, interesting. I'm glad my LBS was able to source one before any potential changes.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Took the Farley out to play in the snow today!! First real snow ride with the 27.5 wheels they did great.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> Took the Farley out to play in the snow today!! First real snow ride with the 27.5 wheels they did great.


Yes! I ran mine at 5 lbs. I was very impressed with them!


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

I did gravel to the trail so ran a little more pressure but they worked great on the climbs!!


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

where was this?


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

The poto in s.e. Michigan!!


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

AH, I am going out tomorrow in Midland MI to try out the Barbagazi's. Probably start around 6-7 LB and go from there.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Those look like good tires hopefully next year the 27.5 will have a few more options. Until the the stock tires are working well.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

I hope they release a 27.5x4 Rougarou.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Agree those look nice as well!


----------



## bcriverjunky (Jul 8, 2014)

FT251 said:


> AH, I am going out tomorrow in Midland MI to try out the Barbagazi's. Probably start around 6-7 LB and go from there.


What time are you going?


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

bcriverjunky said:


> What time are you going?


noon,


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Heading out to Island Lake now!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## yamaha46 (Jul 17, 2009)

What cranks and bottom bracket fit the 2016 Farley?

Loking at Race Face Turbine or Next sl, they come in 2 spindle lengths 170mm or 190mm (177/197).

The 177/197 refers to the rear drop out spacing. The 2016 has the wider 197 but supposed to have the same q factor as last years 177.

So which race face size fits the 2016 Farley?
As race face comes on most of the range i'm guessing someone might know or could check.
Thanks.


----------



## crohnsy (Sep 11, 2009)

yamaha46 said:


> What cranks and bottom bracket fit the 2016 Farley?
> 
> Loking at Race Face Turbine or Next sl, they come in 2 spindle lengths 170mm or 190mm (177/197).
> 
> ...


They both do. 170 spindle is stock on 9.8


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

Thought I'd add to the first snow ride pics.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## rain100 (Sep 12, 2014)

yamaha46 said:


> What cranks and bottom bracket fit the 2016 Farley?
> 
> Loking at Race Face Turbine or Next sl, they come in 2 spindle lengths 170mm or 190mm (177/197).
> 
> ...


The Farley 2016 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 use a raceface 169mm spindle that is for normally used on 177mm spaced fat bikes; however, when you flip the direct mount ring so that it moves the chainline out, you have the correct chainline for a 197mm rear end.

They even post a chart about all their fatbike chainlines here: http://raceface.com/comp/pdf/FatBike-CrankSetup-Chainline.pdf

Here Kristofer Henry of 44 bikes illustrates a flipped chainring of Raceface manufacture, as well as one from Wolf Tooth Components:

__
https://flic.kr/p/16139981105

In short, if you want the least q factor possible, build with a race face crankset + 169mm spindle + direct mount narrow wide ring.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> Heading out to Island Lake now!
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk












Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## yamaha46 (Jul 17, 2009)

Thanks 'rain100' that makes sense.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Anyone running a 5 or 7 with Mulefuts & switched down to a narrower tyre (3.8-4") rather than the 4.7"? Any recommendations for non-snow/general trail & natural single track?


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

The 2015 FaRLEY 6 came with them and they work great with the 3.8 Hodags. If you are looking for a faster tires I suggest you look at the Bontrager Rougarau's
https://www.google.com/search?q=bon...KHUfYCW4Q7AkIPg&dpr=1.1#imgrc=uIrkikWwTylXmM:


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

FT251 said:


> The 2015 FaRLEY 6 came with them and they work great with the 3.8 Hodags. If you are looking for a faster tires I suggest you look at the Bontrager Rougarau's
> https://www.google.com/search?q=bon...KHUfYCW4Q7AkIPg&dpr=1.1#imgrc=uIrkikWwTylXmM:


Thanks! I'm just looking for thinner options when I wear down the Barbegazis (which may be some time!). At that point I may be looking at 27.5 rims but just wondering what 4" options there are to partner up with the 80mm Mulefuts. We don't get much snow here but I wanted the F5 as my entrance into Fat Biking and I absolutely love it.


----------



## toukoq84 (Oct 31, 2015)

First snowriding, i like so much :thumbsup:


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Anyone running a 5 or 7 with Mulefuts & switched down to a narrower tyre (3.8-4") rather than the 4.7"? Any recommendations for non-snow/general trail & natural single track?


Hodags, or Rougarou is looking good.


----------



## reelsimple88 (Nov 24, 2015)

Can I fit 27.5 plus combo on the 2016 Farley 7? I would like to eventually put slimmer tires cruising around the beach streets. Always in thanks


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

reelsimple88 said:


> Can I fit 27.5 plus combo on the 2016 Farley 7? I would like to eventually put slimmer tires cruising around the beach streets. Always in thanks


You can fit 27.5+, 27.5 x 4, 29+, 26x5.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Waiting for my new boots to show up this afternoon so I can go ride!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> Anyone have a suggestion for a rear rack that mounts to stock bungs? I saw one online that you had to attach the bracket with rubber and clamps to the frame and one Surley that needed a new seatpost clamp to attach to. One was cheesy and one heavy duty but was $150.
> 
> I need something solid but it does not need to hold three days of camping supplies.


Nothing?

My dealer said they were expecting one. For three weeks. Nothing on the Trek website.

Not one person is running a rear rack?


----------



## reelsimple88 (Nov 24, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> Nothing?
> 
> My dealer said they were expecting one. For three weeks. Nothing on the Trek website.
> 
> Not one person is running a rear rack?


http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/2015-trek-farley-6-8-fat-bikes-918667-13.html


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Thanks but I need a rack to mount on the bike not a rack to put the bike on.


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> Thanks but I need a rack to mount on the bike not a rack to put the bike on.


I'll be interested in the response to this as well.


----------



## M.Hunt (Oct 8, 2015)

M.Hunt said:


> Anybody mounted an X-Fusion Hilo Strate to a Farley? That's probably up next for me.
> 
> I finally got the Bluto on my F7 two days ago. Of course, it's been raining ever since.





LunchRider said:


> I have not, but would be very interested in your findings.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I wound up with a good deal on a KS LEV Integra. Fits with no issues, and that's on the small frame (15.5) F7.


----------



## SHowley2003 (Feb 21, 2008)

Does anyone know if the front wheel on the Farley 5 can be adapted to fit a 150mm thru axle? I'm curious in case I ever wanted to change forks. I assume it is as I'm guessing the hub on the F5 and F7 is the same and Trek just uses different adapters. However, I know on other bikes they make specific hubs that aren't interchangeable. Any insight will be appreciated.


----------



## Sparky697 (Feb 10, 2015)

Pretty sure the hubs on the 5 are the same a the 6 last year and are not convertible without machining your own spacers. Look through the 6 and 8 thread to see how they managed. 

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Jeff_G said:


> Thanks but I need a rack to mount on the bike not a rack to put the bike on.


The Topeak Super Tourist rack (non disc) will fit if you mount it to the inside of the frame bosses (it sits a little high).









It needs a seatpost abaptor to support the front (unless you fancy fabricating a long bracket to support it from the frame).









I was all set to get one of those, but saw an almost identical design in the shop (Halfords!) that was matt black, and a better colour match to my frame.

I cut the supports down by about 40mm so it sat lower over the back wheel and fabricated my own bracket for the front. It is too early to say how well it will last.









It acts as a mudguard, at least.


----------



## Mattoid (Aug 1, 2006)

SHowley2003 said:


> Does anyone know if the front wheel on the Farley 5 can be adapted to fit a 150mm thru axle? I'm curious in case I ever wanted to change forks. I assume it is as I'm guessing the hub on the F5 and F7 is the same and Trek just uses different adapters. However, I know on other bikes they make specific hubs that aren't interchangeable. Any insight will be appreciated.


I chatted with a Trek rep yesterday about the hub on the 5 and was told that it is not convertible.


----------



## SHowley2003 (Feb 21, 2008)

Mattoid said:


> I chatted with a Trek rep yesterday about the hub on the 5 and was told that it is not convertible.


Thank you for the information. I truly appreciate the insight.

This is so frustrating. I'm not sure why Trek does this on so many bikes. It is consistent across the line that they have the same model wheel with different versions depending on the price point of the bike. My ignorant understanding of the business makes me think that it would be cheaper to manufacture one consistent hub with two or three interchangeable end caps and axles. Plus it would also increase the upgrade bug which means people would be ordering these parts to go with the wheels.


----------



## Sparky697 (Feb 10, 2015)

SHowley2003 said:


> Thank you for the information. I truly appreciate the insight.
> 
> This is so frustrating. I'm not sure why Trek does this on so many bikes. It is consistent across the line that they have the same model wheel with different versions depending on the price point of the bike. My ignorant understanding of the business makes me think that it would be cheaper to manufacture one consistent hub with two or three interchangeable end caps and axles. Plus it would also increase the upgrade bug which means people would be ordering these parts to go with the wheels.


Maybe they got really good deals on the forks and hubs to make it more cost effective for the 5.

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

I don't know if it's anything like the Farley 6 which can't take a 150mm fork normally however there's a guy on the Farley 6/8 thread that produces custom spacers to make it fit.

John


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

Picked up my Farley 7 today and couldn't be happier. Took it for a ride and absolutely loved it. I wasn't sure I'd like the brakes but they seem to work great, the tires roll really well on every surface I encountered and the gearing is perfect for me. The bike feels really good, the geometry for me is perfect. Climbing feels much easier then my Fatboy, not sure why but it was noticeable. This is my third fat bike and easily the best I have owned yet. Great job Trek!


----------



## midschool22 (Apr 13, 2012)

Took my 7 out for the first snowfall of the year. It handled it perfectly.


----------



## Bizarro (Apr 20, 2006)

Hey guys.. .ok... anyone have any pics or more pics on the Farley 9?!?!!  I might pick one up and need more stoke! This would be my second fat bit and have the second 5 inch wheel set already with Bud and Lou so that's cool. It's really about the 9 or 9.6.. I like the 9 a lot though.. great drive train..bluto..wheels..etc..I wouldn't mind carbon but want front suspension. My fat bike now is fully rigid steel pig.. love it but want the Farley.. will weigh less and very versatile with differ wheels to put on. I weigh about 255 with gear and ride hard. 

Whatcha guys think!?! 

thanks!
Cheers!


----------



## TrekStache (Oct 23, 2015)

*Farley9*


----------



## Bizarro (Apr 20, 2006)

TrekStache said:


> View attachment 1031690
> View attachment 1031691


Ohhhhh man thank you good sir TrekStache! yup... purrrttty ! How you like that beast? Looks like your in a hostel? Traveling with it ?

How do you like the overall of the bike?

Thanks man for the stokeage!


----------



## TrekStache (Oct 23, 2015)

Ha in my basement.

Love it man, looks sick in person, and a lot of fun on the trail. I am looking forward to a fun winter.

Carbon would be nice, but I got sucked into the paint job. Flat blue is on another level.


----------



## Mike ladrach (Nov 28, 2015)

I just upgraded my 5 with a raceface cinch turbine direct mount 28 tooth crank and slx rear derailleur. Not 1x11 but I'm hoping I can push through the snow with this gearing. If not I can go down to 26 teeth on the crank or maybe a 11-40 praxis 10 speed cassette.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I did a double take at first - thought that was a blue Stache.
That's what I get for looking at the forum with my phone.


----------



## tomsaurus (Nov 29, 2015)

*the blue stache*

I think the same thing when I see mine in the garage with the rest of my bikes. At first it just looks like a blue hard-tail with extra knobby tires. It's only when I go to take the front wheel off and put the bike on my rack that I realize just how big the hoops and tires are.


----------



## tonyvt (Mar 26, 2010)

I joined team Farley this afternoon with the purchase of a new 2016 Farley 7, pics to follow soon as I get a chance to get it outside in the sun.

Question about the sliding rear drop outs. How is everyone positioning the rear wheel?


----------



## SHowley2003 (Feb 21, 2008)

tonyvt said:


> I joined team Farley this afternoon with the purchase of a new 2016 Farley 7, pics to follow soon as I get a chance to get it outside in the sun.
> 
> Question about the sliding rear drop outs. How is everyone positioning the rear wheel?


The over simplified answer is forward for trail riding back for more float in the snow.


----------



## tonyvt (Mar 26, 2010)

SHowley2003 said:


> The over simplified answer is forward for trail riding back for more float in the snow.


Thanks for confirming what I thought might be the case. I'll leave it set back where it was when delivered and hope that Vermont gets some natural snow soon.


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

I have never adjusted drop outs before, can someone walk me through it? Mine are set all the way back right now.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

SHowley2003 said:


> Does anyone know if the front wheel on the Farley 5 can be adapted to fit a 150mm thru axle?





JohnMcL7 said:


> I don't know if it's anything like the Farley 6 which can't take a 150mm fork normally however there's a guy on the Farley 6/8 thread that produces custom spacers to make it fit.
> John


I've just checked mine, and it is 15mm clear through the middle with the QR adaptors removed. While I haven't checked with a micrometer, it looks like the adaptors on the Farley 6 thread will work.


----------



## Doug_ID (Feb 22, 2009)

I am late to the party but here is a pic of my 5 from my first ride today.

Sunset Fat Biking @ Hells Gate by Doug, on Flickr


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Not so late really - and congrats


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

*Tyre / front mech clearance - fixed!*

I found that the rear tyre buzzes the front derailleur on the 5 if you try and slide the dropouts all the way forwards with the stock tyres (and is generally in a poor place to pick up mud and stuff).

I want to keep my 2X setup, and have no interest in going to 1X, but the good news is that front derailleurs are coming up on ebay for cheap.

A SRAM X0 36T S3 top pull front mech is a straight swap with the stock mech and gives about 10mm / 3/8" more clearance. (It also keeps the moving part of the mech away from the tyre.)

X0 top pull on left, stock X5 dual pull on right - note how much the cable clamp bolt sticks out.










This is the clearance with the dropout about 3/4 way forward with the stock mech. This was as close as I could run it:










Same dropout setting with the top pull mech. Looks like it could have been designed for it:










There's enough clearance to set the dropouts all the way forwards now, which does make a very noticeable difference to handling (it's *really* easy to get the front wheel up :thumbsup: ):










It's only the X0 mech that is available in top pull for the stock chainrings (AFAIK), so it would be an expensive fix for little gain at RRP, but they seem to come up on ebay quite cheaply.

HTH


----------



## Mattoid (Aug 1, 2006)

Nice job Misterg! Trek really should have used a derailleur on the F5 that clears a slammed stock tire configuration.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

*Tyres on the F5*

I don't think any photos I've seen so far really do the sheer fatness of the Barbegazi tyres on the F5 justice. Here's one that does. Bike on right has 2.1" Black Jacks on it for comparison.


----------



## G-Choro (Jul 30, 2010)

Does anyone know what max size of chainring can be run on the 9.8? Comes with a 30, and there isn't much clearance between the stay and ring. Can I run a 32? 34?


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

G-Choro said:


> Does anyone know what max size of chainring can be run on the 9.8? Comes with a 30, and there isn't much clearance between the stay and ring. Can I run a 32? 34?


I have been thinking the same thing i know a 32 fits but don't have a 34 to try!!


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

running a 32 dm on mine. dont think a dm 34 will fit maybe with a spider.


----------



## G-Choro (Jul 30, 2010)

tadraper said:


> I have been thinking the same thing i know a 32 fits but don't have a 34 to try!!


Good to know! Thanks.


----------



## larryarroyo (Mar 29, 2012)

Tincup69 said:


> Picked up my Farley 7 today and couldn't be happier. Took it for a ride and absolutely loved it. I wasn't sure I'd like the brakes but they seem to work great, the tires roll really well on every surface I encountered and the gearing is perfect for me. The bike feels really good, the geometry for me is perfect. Climbing feels much easier then my Fatboy, not sure why but it was noticeable. This is my third fat bike and easily the best I have owned yet. Great job Trek!


Did you notice the two threaded holes where the front derailleur should be mounted? Does yours covered?


----------



## tonyvt (Mar 26, 2010)

larryarroyo said:


> Did you notice the two threaded holes where the front derailleur should be mounted? Does yours covered?


I'm planning on installing an MRP 1X S3/E-Mount Model over mine.
https://static1.squarespace.com/sta.../1394673023154/MRP_1xV2_S3_E_instructions.pdf


----------



## bfranco (Sep 21, 2007)

I'll sell my 2016 Trek Farley 9.8 it's got Enve bars, XT brakes, Thomson 50mm X4. The rest is stock. I'm just more of a FS guy I guess, and I'm drooling over a new Ibis HD3. It's on CL if anyone is interested?


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Interesting day. I went to a Winter Bike Expo at a LBS. They had reps from bike companies and aftermarket suppliers. 30 demo bikes from Salsa, Surely and Trek. It's warm here so the track was mud, wet snow and glare ice with wood obstacles and a tar path next to it. 

I'm not super technical when it comes to tech, geometry and I don't even know what "manualing" means so don't expect some great review. 

I rode the fully suspended Carbon Bucksaw, Blackbarrow, Wednesday, Ice Cream Truck, and four Treks. Probably 8 bikes total. 

I managed to crash the Bucksaw full carbon full suspension bike on a 180 degree wooden burm they built. Front tire slid out. That thing is stupid cool. Now I want a dropper post. Awesome. 

I rode all the bikes on an off camber hill that had sloppy snow. All the bikes (including my 7) slid out on me to some degree. The worst was the Trek with the Hodags. Not impressed. The tires felt like the may have more PSI or the profile makes them not as bouncy so take it for what it's worth. (close to 0?) 

I can honestly say there is not one bike there that I liked more or had to have compared to my Farely 7. Granted the conditions were not there to really feel the suspension bikes work. I am sure the I would trade my bike for the Bucksaw even money was no object. 

I told that to the LBS guy and he just nodded and said the Trek's are beginning to really get noticed.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Jeff_G said:


> Interesting day. I went to a Winter Bike Expo at a LBS. They had reps from bike companies and aftermarket suppliers. 30 demo bikes from Salsa, Surely and Trek. It's warm here so the track was mud, wet snow and glare ice with wood obstacles and a tar path next to it.
> 
> I'm not super technical when it comes to tech, geometry and I don't even know what "manualing" means so don't expect some great review.
> 
> ...


You shouldn't have ridden a Bucksaw.... I made the same mistake and now have one in my garage. It would be the last bike I sold and I may even get rid of a kid or two first.

My Beargrease owning neighbor won't ride mine- he says his wife won't let him buy one and he doesn't want to be lusting after a bike he can't have.

I wasn't impressed with the 27.5" Hodags in any of the similar sloppy conditions I've ridden either. They seem to work about as well as my Jumbo Jims, which isn't saying much. Dry stuff they both excel, but when the tough get going......


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> Nothing?
> 
> My dealer said they were expecting one. For three weeks. Nothing on the Trek website.
> 
> Not one person is running a rear rack?


Talked to Trek reps this weekend about a rear rack. One said Bontrager is probably working on one but he wasn't sure. And the other shrugged his shoulders while the LBS guy showed me a Salsa Alternator that will fit if you replace your quick release seat post clamp with one that has attachment points.

I set it on the bike and it looks like it will fit well (close but not too close) to the tire etc.


----------



## Doug_ID (Feb 22, 2009)

Jeff_G said:


> Talked to Trek reps this weekend about a rear rack. One said Bontrager is probably working on one but he wasn't sure. And the other shrugged his shoulders while the LBS guy showed me a Salsa Alternator that will fit if you replace your quick release seat post clamp with one that has attachment points.
> 
> I set it on the bike and it looks like it will fit well (close but not too close) to the tire etc.


a friend is running the blackburn outpost rack. He had to use hose clamps for the top attachment.

Blackburn Outpost Fat Bike Rack | Backcountry.com


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Doug_ID said:


> a friend is running the blackburn outpost rack. He had to use hose clamps for the top attachment.
> 
> Blackburn Outpost Fat Bike Rack | Backcountry.com


I also think that Tubus has some racks that would work. There is a version that you can use in conjuction with the quick release.

J.


----------



## Grouch51 (Jan 14, 2015)

What's the simple solution to those stupid optical gear displays on the F5 shifters? In stock form, the optical displays result in either the brakes being too far outboard or the shifters being too far inboard. Should I just replace them with Zee shifters? Are SLX shifters available in Bar Mount form without the optical display?


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

Grouch51 said:


> What's the simple solution to those stupid optical gear displays on the F5 shifters? In stock form, the optical displays result in either the brakes being too far outboard or the shifters being too far inboard. Should I just replace them with Zee shifters? Are SLX shifters available in Bar Mount form without the optical display?


you can dig thru this to find the cheapest shifter that includes the blanking plates SHIMANO Dealer's Manual / User's Manual


----------



## Gigantic (Aug 31, 2012)

Grouch51 said:


> What's the simple solution to those stupid optical gear displays on the F5 shifters? In stock form, the optical displays result in either the brakes being too far outboard or the shifters being too far inboard. Should I just replace them with Zee shifters? Are SLX shifters available in Bar Mount form without the optical display?


you can remove the gear indicators on SLX shifters, they're optional.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Natedeezy said:


> And theres the whole Shimano brakes not being great in the cold thing...
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


my shimanos work fine in the cold. -25 out. were a little stiff but atleast dont scream like a turkey like those POS avids.


----------



## Grouch51 (Jan 14, 2015)

Gigantic said:


> you can remove the gear indicators on SLX shifters, they're optional.


Ah...reading a bit more on the SLX, it appears the bar mount versions include the indicators AND the blanking cover. Sweet!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Grouch51 said:


> Ah...reading a bit more on the SLX, it appears the bar mount versions include the indicators AND the blanking cover. Sweet!


Yep, I've an old pair of SLX shifters on a 2011 bike and they have the blanking cover inside. Quite handy for space saving on bars. Just wish the Deores on my F5 had the same but since I have sworn to myself to not add a dropper or other such "technical nonsense" that I have on my other FS bike to my fat bike it shouldn't be an issue.

you could try this but I wouldn't recommend: Remove Gear Window on MTB Shifters


----------



## scubaklook (Apr 20, 2005)

Sold my Fatboy a while back and ended up with one of these after demoing a bunch of bikes. I went with the Old Man Mountain rack since it is what I had. I was going to try the blackburn but it looked like it would be sitting too high for me. Axiom and Tubus also have fat racks out now.

Had to go with clamps since I couldnt find a seat collar with rack mounts that was the right size. Salsa makes a rack mount that goes on the seat post rather than a seat collar that might work.

I still have some things to tweak but am really liking this bike.


----------



## slowride454 (Jan 11, 2014)

I picked up an Axiom a few days ago and will get it mounted this weekend. Pictures soon.


----------



## euromade (Nov 12, 2015)

On Lake Michigan (Grand Haven) this past weekend...love this bike...converted it to 1x11 and upgraded the brakes.














Also, Looking for a frame bag that would fit this (19") frame...picked up one of the Revelate Designs frame bag in medium but it doesn't fit - too long. In addition to this the front strap is not long enough to wrap around the headset. Even if I go to the smaller size I would not be able to attach this bag.







Any ideas; with pictures...
Thanks!


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

euromade said:


> Also, Looking for a frame bag that would fit this (19") frame...picked up one of the Revelate Designs frame bag in medium but it doesn't fit - too long. In addition to this the front strap is not long enough to wrap around the headset. Even if I go to the smaller size I would not be able to attach this bag.
> View attachment 1034552
> 
> Any ideas; with pictures...
> Thanks!


The Revelate tangle bag is not meant to go around the headset, the 2 loops on the front angled part both go on the downtube


----------



## Mattoid (Aug 1, 2006)

Does anyone have a Revelate bag on their '16 Farley? If so, care to share your frame size/bag size and fit experience?


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

I have one that I will install later and provide feedback.


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

Looking for any feedback on Trek Farley 5 vs 9.6, Specifically the differences with 27.5X4 riding characteristics. I have a Farley 5 looking at possible upgrade. I ride in all conditions in west MI.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

aquamogal said:


> Looking for any feedback on Trek Farley 5 vs 9.6, Specifically the differences with 27.5X4 riding characteristics. I have a Farley 5 looking at possible upgrade. I ride in all conditions in west MI.


Make up a set of 27.5 x 3.8 wheels and have the best of both worlds. The jackelope wheels won't work on your fork, you have 135 spacing. The rear one will work so you could buy a DT Swiss hub and lace it to a jackelope hoop. JMHO. Or get the 9.6 and get a set of 26x5 wheels.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Farely 5, and 29+
Now, you have not only the ability to run 4.8" tires, but also 3.8" tires on those same 80mm rims (which is virtually the same as running 27.5x3.8) plus your 29+ set.

*THAT* is the best of both worlds. Even forgetting the 29+ and running 3.8" tires in the Summer until you can budget in the 29+. Or get some 50mm 27.5 and run anything from 3" to the 3.8" tires.
Can't do that with one of the 9's,and another reason the 7 is the sweet spot (or 5).
You can run 3.8" tires on the 5 and 7, but you can't run 4.8" tires on the 9 models.
Boom - you're welcome.


----------



## [TA] (Dec 3, 2008)

26x4.8" tires fit just fine on ALL 2016 Farley's; 5, 7, 9, 9.6, 9.8 You can also run the dropouts all the way forward (440mm) on any 1x Farley, or run some of the higher end SRAM FD's.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Gambit, I have seen pictures of a 9.6 with 26 x 4.7 Barbagazis on it. 

From Trek's webpage:Even fatter
Farley's new wider 197mm rear axle spacing accepts tires up to 5˝ in width, meaning there's no adventure that can't be conquered by this go-anywhere machine.

Accommodates all wheel systems
Versatility is the name of the game. Farley now accommodates capable 26˝ x 5˝ or fast 27.5˝ x 4˝ wheels, so you can dial your ride for your style of adventure.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

You missed the point.
Of course they will fit, it's the same frame.
The point is you have to buy another set of wheels.

With the 5 and 7, it's as I outlined above.


----------



## tilltheend (Dec 29, 2011)

Anyone come up with a solution to stud the new 27.5 tire? Does the grip stud work in the hodag? I have a new 9.6 coming as my first fatbike, since snow is light this year Im thinking I may need some studded tires.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> You missed the point.
> Of course they will fit, it's the same frame.
> The point is you have to buy another set of wheels.
> 
> With the 5 and 7, it's as I outlined above.


26 x 3.8 isn't the same as 27.5x 3.8. Ride them both. I have.


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

I really only want one bike just wondering if anyone notices a performance improvement and think that the 27.5 X 4 is a do it all option ? Or just go with higher performance 26X4 lighter tires as second set for farley 5.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

FT251 said:


> 26 x 3.8 isn't the same as 27.5x 3.8. Ride them both. I have.


More than close enough in exchange for the versatility.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

aquamogal said:


> I really only want one bike just wondering if anyone notices a performance improvement and think that the 27.5 X 4 is a do it all option ? Or just go with higher performance 26X4 lighter tires as second set for farley 5.


I woud do that because having the 26x5 is worth it.


----------



## euromade (Nov 12, 2015)

I managed to get a Medium Revelate Tangle mounted on my 19" Farley 5. The front strap is very tight! I contacted the manufacturer and they will send me an extension. I like the way it looks on the bike, and the quality of the product appears to be top notch...I had to move the bottle cage one notch down...I can easily store an extra water bootle, some gear, snacks, iPhone 6+, etc


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

euromade said:


> I managed to get a Medium Revelate Tangle mounted on my 19" Farley 5. The front strap is very tight! I contacted the manufacturer and they will send me an extension. I like the way it looks on the bike, and the quality of the product appears to be top notch...I had to move the bottle cage one notch down...I can easily store an extra water bootle, some gear, snacks, iPhone 6+, etc


this is the same result i had the front strap is a little short but the Medium Revelate Tangle mounted on my 19" Farley 9.8 looks good and fits well even with this strap tucked away.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Anyone run a rear mudguard on a Farley and if so what? I'm thinking of making my own in similar vein to Mucky Nutz front guards/just bending plastic round. Also, for those that care....you might have trouble fitting a Kyrptonite D-lock to an F5. I just did....tyre/rim too big to even get the lock through :-/


----------



## Natedeezy (Feb 28, 2011)

tadraper said:


> this is the same result i had the front strap is a little short but the Medium Revelate Tangle mounted on my 19" Farley 9.8 looks good and fits well even with this strap tucked away.


Any pics mounted up?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Anyone run a rear mudguard on a Farley and if so what? I'm thinking of making my own in similar vein to Mucky Nutz front guards/just bending plastic round. Also, for those that care....you might have trouble fitting a Kyrptonite D-lock to an F5. I just did....tyre/rim too big to even get the lock through :-/


I put a Dave's Mud Shovel on the back and the front despite the lukewarm reviews. They're pretty inexpensive.

Back: The seatpost mount everybody says is sketchy is probably going to piss me off at some point. I have ridden 100 miles with it and it's been fine but only on the road and light off trail stuff because it's 47 degrees and rainy in MN. I think it may move around in the bumpy single track.

Front: Works great for keeping water etc off the triangle and flying on me from underneath. The problem is when going at a quick pace the water shoots off the front of the tire and then flys up and hits me in the face. May need a Mucky Nutz.

My Kryptonite will fit through the wheel and a bike rack but BARELY. It won't go through the frame/wheel and bike rack.

I had to buy a cable for when I park it in in sketchy areas so I can lock the both the front and rear rims. The thing is so big and cartoon like it garners a lot of attention which makes me nervous.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Jeff_G said:


> I put a Dave's Mud Shovel on the back and the front despite the lukewarm reviews. They're pretty inexpensive.
> 
> Back: The seatpost mount everybody says is sketchy is probably going to piss me off at some point. I have ridden 100 miles with it and it's been fine but only on the road and light off trail stuff because it's 47 degrees and rainy in MN. I think it may move around in the bumpy single track.
> 
> ...


I used the mud shovels last year and they worked ok, my biggest issue was kicking the rear fender when trying to rapidly mount/dismount. I've since switched to the lower profile D-Fenders, but haven't gotten much testing done yet.


----------



## demonbydesign (Sep 6, 2008)

Trek Farley 6's are hideous 

:thumbsup:


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

Grouch51 said:


> What's the simple solution to those stupid optical gear displays on the F5 shifters? In stock form, the optical displays result in either the brakes being too far outboard or the shifters being too far inboard. Should I just replace them with Zee shifters? Are SLX shifters available in Bar Mount form without the optical display?


Yep, ditch the Deore shifters with their crappy windows that fill with moisture, work backwards and clutter your bars. I got a good deal on a Zee shifter as I was converting to1x anyway but anything upwards of SLX should have removable windows. My shifter/brake position is 200% improved now.


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

9.8 owners how are you liking the sram rs brakes so far? 

personally i dont like it as much as my xt's or saint on all my other bikes. braking power is sub par imo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Mine took some time to break in. I was finally getting some good lock up on the trail yesterday. The noise also finally stopped.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## G-Choro (Jul 30, 2010)

tagabalay said:


> 9.8 owners how are you liking the sram rs brakes so far?
> 
> personally i dont like it as much as my xt's or saint on all my other bikes. braking power is sub par imo.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I like them fine. Enough to not bother swapping. Have xtrs on my other bike, which I prefer. But the new Guides work well.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

i may just have to ride it more. only had about 50miles on mine. we will see.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tagabalay said:


> i may just have to ride it more. only had about 50miles on mine. we will see.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes. It took me more than 50 miles to break them in. More like 150.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

good to know. i use the front brakes a lot and that is where i am having trouble with the sram guide. rear brakes works just fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

tagabalay said:


> 9.8 owners how are you liking the sram rs brakes so far?
> 
> personally i dont like it as much as my xt's or saint on all my other bikes. braking power is sub par imo.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


i have 800 miles on my Farley 9.8 and i like these brakes. haven't had any issues and they are working as well as the XT's i had on other bikes.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Anybody put a seat post dropper on a 9.8 yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mkdiehl (Dec 30, 2014)

Have a 9.8 and love it. Already thinking about how to use it in the summer. Would like to add a set of 27.5+ with 3" tires to shed a little weight and increase handling. 
See any problems with this from a BB height etc?
Maybe a 50mm carbon rim.....

Thanks


----------



## G-Choro (Jul 30, 2010)

mkdiehl said:


> Have a 9.8 and love it. Already thinking about how to use it in the summer. Would like to add a set of 27.5+ with 3" tires to shed a little weight and increase handling.
> See any problems with this from a BB height etc?
> Maybe a 50mm carbon rim.....
> 
> Thanks


Love mine as well. Really thinking I might be able to make it my year round bike with some 29+ wheels and a suspension fork up front. I think 29+ fit...

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

mkdiehl said:


> Have a 9.8 and love it. Already thinking about how to use it in the summer. Would like to add a set of 27.5+ with 3" tires to shed a little weight and increase handling.
> See any problems with this from a BB height etc?
> Maybe a 50mm carbon rim.....
> 
> Thanks


40 mm would be a little better for a 3.0 tire.


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

Im running a dropper and 29plus on my 9.8. I think 27.5x3 will drop the bb too much. It will be close to an inch lower or more. Dropper is fun for tech riding and even just goofing off.


----------



## mkdiehl (Dec 30, 2014)

What rims did you buy? Did you do a weight comparison vs stock?


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

Nextie jungle fox on dt350 hubs, 120tpi knards, single speed, with the ks lev 125mm dropper. It is 21lbs as you see it. Vs 24lbs with the wampa/hodags.


----------



## mkdiehl (Dec 30, 2014)

Great info. Thanks. Just one clarification, are both weights above with single speed? IE, the wheels tires were the main reason for the 3lb loss?


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

Yep both SS the 29+ wheelset is 3 lbs lighter. I have since switched to chupacabras and saved another 1/4lb overall. Was going to try the fat b nimble 29+ but was a mere 2.6 at best on a 50mm with a lot of wobble in the casing.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Oops, never mind. Carry on, there no droids here.


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

The real question now is to bluto or not?The rct3 is pretty cheap right now. Just never been a big fan of RS.


----------



## mkdiehl (Dec 30, 2014)

Good question. Was going to ask you. With the 3" do you need it? Don't really want to gain back the weight I lose by adding a fork but maybe it is necessary. Then what am I gaining over stock?

I already have a 22.5lb full suspension race bike.....so not sure what my real goal is.....just looking for something a little different to race at times to mix it up I think. 
Maybe hard tail 29+ vs my race bike at same weight will have different strengths/weaknesses.


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

I also have a ti gnarvester with an mrp stage up front. It is super comfy in comparison to the farley. i can bomb down rougher sections on it where i have to pick and choose with the farley. The farley is more precise and handles better than the gnar setup 29+. I prefer the geo of the farley but is a bit rougher than the gnar. Ideally i would love to have 150mm spaced mrp stage with 110mm of travel for the farley.


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

do you guys know what socket size i need to losen the rear axle bolt? i want to have my dropout slammed forward


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Got an extra wheel set and added the minions.


----------



## Doug_ID (Feb 22, 2009)

tagabalay said:


> do you guys know what socket size i need to losen the rear axle bolt? i want to have my dropout slammed forward
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


20mm


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

thank you. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Sparky697 (Feb 10, 2015)

I'd go with one of the boost 29+ forks available over a Bluto any day. You'll need a new hub but would be way better. Save the large/rigid combo for winter and run suspension /29+ the other 3 seasons. 

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk


----------



## silver2ks4 (Oct 29, 2011)

I agree bluto is not ideal. I would much rather have a 34-36mm fork. I already have 2 wheels built with 150mm hubs which are way stiffer than any boosted wheel would be. I have a line on a fox plus for a good deal. just dont want to rebuild the wheels then still have two different hub sizes. Would preffer to have cross compatibility with two forks and 3 wheels. Not to mention that 4" is the biggest tire thats going to work on any of the current plus forks. Come on fox, mrp, manitou, dvo, boss, anybody besides that laufing damperless thing.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

silver2ks4 said:


> Nextie jungle fox on dt350 hubs, 120tpi knards, single speed, with the ks lev 125mm dropper. It is 21lbs as you see it. Vs 24lbs with the wampa/hodags.


I just put a dropper on this afternoon. I am stoked!
RS reverb stealth.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> I just put a dropper on this afternoon. I am stoked!
> RS reverb stealth.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


any pics?


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Here you go! I have only played around the neighborhood with it, but it allows me move around the cockpit like my old BMX bike days. (Long time ago.....)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Pic of the controller placement.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## supercal20077 (Sep 7, 2010)

Well, in 2 short days I sold my beloved Beargrease 2 and picked up a Farley 9.8! The difference is unbelievable! The Farley is soooo Fricken fast and light! taking the tubes out was the easiest conversion I have ever done! I threw a WTB Pure V Pro and Ergon GX1's. I also ordered a Red 36 chain ring for the spring time! The bike is very smooth and it accelerates like no bodys business! I am really excited for my Procaliber 9.8 (matte black) to show up in a few weeks! BK


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

supercal20077 said:


> Well, in 2 short days I sold my beloved Beargrease 2 and picked up a Farley 9.8! The difference is unbelievable! The Farley is soooo Fricken fast and light! taking the tubes out was the easiest conversion I have ever done! I threw a WTB Pure V Pro and Ergon GX1's. I also ordered a Red 36 chain ring for the spring time! The bike is very smooth and it accelerates like no bodys business! I am really excited for my Procaliber 9.8 (matte black) to show up in a few weeks! BK


Not sure this will fit Red 36 chain ring.. i put a 32 on just to test and it is pretty tight and i thought someone said a 34 came close to hitting.. just an FYI.

Great to hear how much you are enjoying the bike!! it is the only bike i have ridden since i got it..


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

supercal20077 said:


> Well, in 2 short days I sold my beloved Beargrease 2 and picked up a Farley 9.8! The difference is unbelievable! The Farley is soooo Fricken fast and light! taking the tubes out was the easiest conversion I have ever done! I threw a WTB Pure V Pro and Ergon GX1's. I also ordered a Red 36 chain ring for the spring time! The bike is very smooth and it accelerates like no bodys business! I am really excited for my Procaliber 9.8 (matte black) to show up in a few weeks! BK


Does your WTB have oval rails?
I put my WTB with round rails on and found too much play.

I had to put the stock seat back on until I got my dropper.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## supercal20077 (Sep 7, 2010)

Yea, I also think the 36 won't fit, but we (the LBS and I) are going to see and if not, I may order an elliptical ring. 

Lunchrider, I put the Pro on and torqued it to spec with no issues. I have 35 miles on it so far and it does feel like I am cheating.


----------



## fatchanceti (Jan 12, 2005)

supercal20077 said:


> Well, in 2 short days I sold my beloved Beargrease 2 and picked up a Farley 9.8! The difference is unbelievable! The Farley is soooo Fricken fast and light! taking the tubes out was the easiest conversion I have ever done! I threw a WTB Pure V Pro and Ergon GX1's. I also ordered a Red 36 chain ring for the spring time! The bike is very smooth and it accelerates like no bodys business! I am really excited for my Procaliber 9.8 (matte black) to show up in a few weeks! BK


And I am the thrilled "new" owner of a sweet blue Beargrease! Thanks BK!

-Ryan


----------



## supercal20077 (Sep 7, 2010)

Ryan, I loved that bike! But I think the 9.8 will do just fine!


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

supercal20077 said:


> Yea, I also think the 36 won't fit, but we (the LBS and I) are going to see and if not, I may order an elliptical ring.
> 
> Lunchrider, I put the Pro on and torqued it to spec with no issues. I have 35 miles on it so far and it does feel like I am cheating.


I got a few rides out of mine , then I came down unexpectedly on it while riding Torn Shirt. That was it, I tried to tighten it back down on the trail with no luck. I ended up standing for the last mile or so.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Quick question for anyone that has adjusted their chain stay to the forward position.

Did you have to adjust you rear derailleur once you moved it forward? I moved mine forward and noticed the High and the Low gear are off a bit? 

Any other things I should consider?

Thanks!


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

LunchRider said:


> Did you have to adjust you rear derailleur once you moved it forward?


I didn't, but YMMV.

I don't think it would be unusual to have to tweak the derailleur set up *a little*, but major adjustment would be a warning flag that something is wrong (to me, anyway).

Other things:

Axle done up tight?
No dirt or muck between the sliding dropout and the frame?
"Big Nut" tightened to the correct torque?
Dropouts moved evenly each side?


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Im not well versed in derailleur adjustment yet, so I put it back. I really want to ride tomorrow!

Yes I used the correct torque specs and it is clean between the components. However, I noticed the chain had some slack in the low gear. I was going start with the b tension screw.

Anyhow, I put it back and all is well. I will try again when I have more time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

I adjusted the b screw when I moved them all the way forward. Other than that nothing was needed.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Thanks for the confirmation.

BTW, are you going to the Abominable ride at the poto this Saturday?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> Pic of the controller placement.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thank you sir. Kinda stoked I got it for my Farley as well. I've been doing "normal" mtb trails and this thing is a must.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> Thanks for the confirmation.
> 
> BTW, are you going to the Abominable ride at the poto this Saturday?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


not sure if i am doing that or racing at fort custer!!!


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Nice! Never heard of that trail system, I looked up. It looks cool.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> Nice! Never heard of that trail system, I looked up. It looks cool.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


here is the info on the race

2015 Michigan Fat Bike Series Round # 1


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

So I would be in the 45+ category. Would I specifically be in the Masters A+ or in the B a 45+ as well.
What is the difference between A and B?


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> So I would be in the 45+ category. Would I specifically be in the Masters A+ or in the B a 45+ as well.
> What is the difference between A and B?


The difference between A and B is b class is generally newer to racing.

Many over 45 race the standard A class but they are the FAST guys.. it really all depends on what you want to do.

they are fun and when there is lots of snow they are even more fun.


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

I am looking at 27.5X4 what is the lowest tire pressure you have run on Trek 9 series tubeless. I like a bit of squish


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I have run 5. The 9.8 Wampa wheels have a sticker with a 5 lb minimum warning.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

i have a 9.8. i run 8 front and 6 rear. i am 155lbs by the way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> I put a Dave's Mud Shovel on the back and the front despite the lukewarm reviews. They're pretty inexpensive.
> 
> Back: The seatpost mount everybody says is sketchy is probably going to piss me off at some point. I have ridden 100 miles with it and it's been fine but only on the road and light off trail stuff because it's 47 degrees and rainy in MN. I think it may move around in the bumpy single track.
> 
> ...


Thanks ! Will have a look at these. Might try a spare Mucky Nutz I have on the front but as it's an AL rigid fork I'm not too worried about crud on the front....more about keeping my arse dry when it's wet !


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

hi anyone have the frame weight of farley 5 med and farley 9.6 carbon med ? Thanks


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

aquamogal said:


> I am looking at 27.5X4 what is the lowest tire pressure you have run on Trek 9 series tubeless. I like a bit of squish


if you're tubeless anything under 5 is at risk of burping


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

LunchRider said:


> Quick question for anyone that has adjusted their chain stay to the forward position.
> 
> Did you have to adjust you rear derailleur once you moved it forward? I moved mine forward and noticed the High and the Low gear are off a bit?
> 
> ...


I assume this is not normal but mine had an excessively long cable housing, it didn't shift for crap before moving the drops

Moving my dropouts all the way forward caused even more binding of the cable in the housing, I trimmed the housing shorter and lubed the cable before making adjustments, it's all good now

I believe that what others have said is more normal, a little adjustment of the b-screw or nothing at all


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> The difference between A and B is b class is generally newer to racing.
> 
> Many over 45 race the standard A class but they are the FAST guys.. it really all depends on what you want to do.
> 
> they are fun and when there is lots of snow they are even more fun.


Well my best fat bike time on the poto is 1:52.
Probably class B.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

TitanofChaos said:


> I assume this is not normal but mine had an excessively long cable housing, it didn't shift for crap before moving the drops
> 
> Moving my dropouts all the way forward caused even more binding of the cable in the housing, I trimmed the housing shorter and lubed the cable before making adjustments, it's all good now
> 
> I believe that what others have said is more normal, a little adjustment of the b-screw or nothing at all


Second attempt worked out well with a B screw adjustment.

Thanks to everyone for the input!


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

I finally pulled the trigger on a rear rack. What I ended up with is the best fit I could find but not ideal. Also not cheap nor is it a direct bolt on.

One of the LBS's and two Trek Reps said Salsa Alternator. I did not like the fact that I would lose the quick release seat post clamp and I would have over $150 into it when all was said and done. (rack plus new seat post clamp)

Blackburn is what I went with per a different LBS. They installed it but I knew it would not work as is right when I saw it. The rack is designed to be mounted to the axle which can't be done on the Farley. It does have parts to mount it to bungs as well.

When attached alternatively to the bungs it pushes the rack way forward under the seat because the bungs are 4" or so forward of the axle.

The top of the rack is a separate section. We unbolted it and turned it around backwards and which pushed it towards the back of the bike and out from under the seat. Now the bracket that holds a light etc was facing the front of the bike. I cut it off.

We mounted the stays a bit oddly one on top of another to a bolt located below the seat post. NOTE: The 15.5" frame does not have this mounting location. You would need a seat post mount for sure.

I got it home and played around with it some more.

First off I was very worried my heals were going to hit. I rode it and sure enough my heals hit when I was testing it. (WTF? I just cut that plate off so no returning it!) Put my size 9 boots on and rode it "normally" and they never hit again. So it's close.

Second, Pleasantly surprised my panniers for my skinny bike will fit. Off topic, the Thule dry bags that are out are super impressive and now on my want list.

Third. I was able to get my Mud Shovel to fit under the rack. BARELY. The rack sits really close to the tire which is a good thing to keep the weight low. I am going to trim up some of the top plate mounting pins to gain another 1/4 inch of clearance for the mud shovel. This will give some room for error. Super happy about this set up.

Overall I'm happy with the end result but it's been a bit frustrating that Trek, with Bontrager as a partner does not have a simple bolt on rack for their fat bikes.


----------



## G-Choro (Jul 30, 2010)

Does anyone know if the 27.5 3.5" Fat B Nimbles will work with the Wampa wheels? Thinking about my summer tire set-up, and I may run these ilo a separate 29+ wheelset.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

You're in acute danger of a "I damaged my rim" post within the same season if you do that. The rim is already vulnerable even with the stock tire.
I'd go 29+


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

From what I have seen those would be to narrow.


----------



## G-Choro (Jul 30, 2010)

Gambit21 said:


> You're in acute danger of a "I damaged my rim" post within the same season if you do that. The rim is already vulnerable even with the stock tire.
> I'd go 29+


Lol. Got it.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## paytonageo (Dec 18, 2015)

New to this forum, but have been following it closely. Decided on a Farley 9.6 and have had it for a few weeks now. I've ridden almost every single day, and am totally loving it. Even when the trails were dry, the poor old Yeti started collecting dust. So far the conditions have ranged from singletrack with snowy spots to singletrack with 4-6" of heavy snow on the ground...I've even ridden it up to the top of a ski area after dark and came down a blue black run. 

I got a small frame, with the only mods being a carbon handlebar, extra chunky grips, xpedo spry pedals, and tubeless (4 oz Stans in each tire). Weight for the whole thing is about 27.5 lbs. 

Anyone know what a chinese carbon 100mm rim wheelset with some dillingers or similar tire would compare to the Antelope/Hodag?

Some comments on tire pressure: 
On dry gravely singletrack with occasional rock gardens the sweet spot for me seems to be around 7-8 / 8-9 psi front and rear (me = 5' 8", 160 lbs). In unconsolidated snow 3-4" deep, I've ran 5-6 psi front and rear and felt that I had pretty good traction. Haven't ran into any problems navigating through underlying rocks either. Once by accident (before I bought a low pressure gauge), I was running about 4 psi front and rear on groomed ski area cat roads, luckily no damage. 

I've also listened to the Trek interview talking about R&D into the 27.5 Hodag size and I'm definitely drinking the kool aid. The bike just feels so fast, and I'm really happy with the tires and rims so far. I think it basically comes down to what you plan on riding - if its <4-6" of snow, groomed, dirt, or anywhere in between this design works really well. If you're truly wanting to ride in the really deep stuff, then go full fat. I may do that eventually, but so far I've been pretty happy. 

Finally, I just wanted to share a bunch of pics of my adventures so far:

Happy Friday!


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Nice post! Send some snow my way (Michigan)!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fat_biike_boy (Dec 20, 2015)

Farley 5 Carbon Fork Options?
Ok, new to the Farley 5 (and the forum).. so two questions...
(1) what options are there to put a carbon fork on it?
I read here that it cannot be converted over to TA. Is the QR hub not convertible? Does this mean I can put on a new hub and use the spoke and rim? Or can I find a carbon fork to fit it? Can you help with a link to a hub that would work?
And (2) Can I convert to TA? Or get a custom conversion? 
There is a carbon fork for sale online from a Trek 9 - wish I could just put it on and get TA. Your input and help is appreciated...


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

*Tapered hoboy carbon fat bike fork (quick release)*



fat_biike_boy said:


> Farley 5 Carbon Fork Options?
> Ok, new to the Farley 5 (and the forum).. so two questions...
> (1) what options are there to put a carbon fork on it?
> I read here that it cannot be converted over to TA. Is the QR hub not convertible? Does this mean I can put on a new hub and use the spoke and rim? Or can I find a carbon fork to fit it? Can you help with a link to a hub that would work?
> ...


Tapered Hoboy Carbon Fat Bike Fork (Quick Release) | Sarma - siberian born fat bikes


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

Roadie confession: the Farley is carefully pushing me into the darkside (MTB)

I can already predict I'll be doing 3-4 races this year with this thing. There's 1 coming up in January. My road coach is already complaining my absence in our winter program and someone ratted me out being on the trails this winter.


----------



## travisjgood (Apr 30, 2012)

:thumbsup:


----------



## midschool22 (Apr 13, 2012)

Muddy session today.


----------



## cadoretteboat (Aug 27, 2011)

KantoBoy said:


> Roadie confession: the Farley is carefully pushing me into the darkside (MTB)
> 
> I can already predict I'll be doing 3-4 races this year with this thing. There's 1 coming up in January. My road coach is already complaining my absence in our winter program and someone ratted me out being on the trails this winter.


Come............come..............


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

KantoBoy said:


> Roadie confession: the Farley is carefully pushing me into the darkside (MTB)
> 
> I can already predict I'll be doing 3-4 races this year with this thing. There's 1 coming up in January. My road coach is already complaining my absence in our winter program and someone ratted me out being on the trails this winter.


I sold my road bike after getting my first mountain bike 20 years ago.
I got tired of close calls with cars, and the trail, being in nature is just so much better.
Rare is the occasion when I miss the road bike, especially given where I live now.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> I sold my road bike after getting my first mountain bike 20 years ago.
> I got tired of close calls with cars, and the trail, being in nature is just so much better.
> Rare is the occasion when I miss the road bike, especially given where I live now.


I took a bit of a wobble and bought the F5...and then a few weeks later at the direction of my girlfriend I bought a Giant Defy 0 road bike (deal was too good to miss). The Defy is still in the box and will come out once the weather improves but the Farley is getting a hammering every weekend. Loved the looks when I took it into the city centre for the commute. I've only seen 3 Fat Bikes in my country so far and mine was one of them!


----------



## tyrone.minton (Feb 15, 2010)

I received by gorgeous Farley 9.6 on Friday. I rode it about 9 miles on one of our local trails and it was glorious. But it was not meant to be. After my ride sunday, I can say that I am probably the first to break a Farley carbon frame. I'll post pictures after I get word back on the warranty replacement. The frame cracked on the bottom of the top tube across the internal cable exit hole, as well as around the junction of the seat tube and seat stays.

The seat tube was properly inserted with at least 110mm of tube in the frame. 

I'm pretty sad right now as this was my first carbon bike and it was such a joy to ride for those few miles. My Trek shop is taking care of it for now, hoping to hear back today on progress.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

I toiled over this decision when purchasing a frame for my build, and this fear landed me with the 2016 alloy frame. Having to deal with warranty on Carbon Frames and Wheels just isn't for me. Even though I know this stuff is rare.


----------



## G-Choro (Jul 30, 2010)

I've had quite a few carbon frames and only one warranty replacement, which was no hassle and netted me the latest model year frame. Good manufacturers don't want to ship garbage product, and they will stand by their warranty or tarnish their brand.

Carbon isn't new anymore, and the stuff being built is plenty durable for its intended use. On the other hand, if you like to bang your gear on every trail obstacle in sight, and expect the manufacturer to warranty your impact damage, then maybe carbon isn't for you. 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

tyrone.minton said:


> I received by gorgeous Farley 9.6 on Friday. I rode it about 9 miles on one of our local trails and it was glorious. But it was not meant to be. After my ride sunday, I can say that I am probably the first to break a Farley carbon frame. I'll post pictures after I get word back on the warranty replacement. The frame cracked on the bottom of the top tube across the internal cable exit hole, as well as around the junction of the seat tube and seat stays.
> 
> The seat tube was properly inserted with at least 110mm of tube in the frame.
> 
> I'm pretty sad right now as this was my first carbon bike and it was such a joy to ride for those few miles. My Trek shop is taking care of it for now, hoping to hear back today on progress.


Sorry to hear about that i hope they fix you up fast. i have the 9.8 and almost 1000 mile on it no issues to date.

I would hate to be waiting for my bike to get fixed.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

How are you guys liking the Barbegazi in wet/muddy conditions?


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> How are you guys liking the Barbegazi in wet/muddy conditions?


I have nothing to compare them to on a fat bike - they're "ok" but I'm not especially impressed - They don't inspire me with confidence on real slop (they remind me of Maxxis Ardents on my skinny hardtail).

They are fine until it comes to really wet, clay slop (although, to be fair to them, I couldn't even stand where they ran out of grip last wekend!)

Plus points are that they don't seem to clog up, or carry mud into the frame.

I suspect running lower pressures would help (currently 5PSI front, 6PSI rear).


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

G-Choro said:


> On the other hand, if you like to bang your gear on every trail obstacle in sight, and expect the manufacturer to warranty your impact damage, then maybe carbon isn't for you.
> 
> Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


The same is true for almost any frame material.

J.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> How are you guys liking the Barbegazi in wet/muddy conditions?


Its all relative to what you expect from them. Are they knarleylike a Bud/Lou -hell no! But they roll a lot easier. They are a good compromise, I've ridden them on snow a couple times. (Believe it or not, Michigan has had no snow to speak of so far this year, last year we had tons by this time and frozen lakes and rivers)
I feel they are a good compromise, they are certainly wide as any 4.7 tire around. They have good float on loose sand too. They roll great on hard pack dirt and the sipeing helps. I personally like them for what they are, if you plan to be in loose snow or deep muddy trails then something with a more aggressive tread will be better at the expense of rolling resistance. It just depends on what you want them to do. I think they corner well and seem to be happy with low pressure as needed. On dry land I find for me 10F/11R is the sweet spot, but i weigh close to 200#. I have had them as low as 6/7 in snow with no trouble.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

FYI only. Not complaining or judging. 

My free hub is being replaced on my 10 week old Farley 7. I think it was defective when new or shortly after. I heard ratcheting about every two miles within a few weeks of new. Brought it in and they adjusted the derail-er. Same noise two miles later. After trying to educate myself I realized it was likely the freehub. Took it back and they couldn't fix it. New one is waiting at the LBS.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Thanks Misterg and FT - Yeah they look like a decent compromise. I only have a hundred and change of upgrade budget left for now (after ordering a 29+ wheel set) so I'm trying to decide if that should go to a Bud for the front, and save the Barbegazzi I remove to replace the rear one at some point.

When it get's that sloppy though, that's when I won't be on the trail much if at all, so maybe I'll hold off on the Bud and ride the stock tires for a bit. Thanks for the input.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> Thanks Misterg and FT - Yeah they look like a decent compromise. I only have a hundred and change of upgrade budget left for now (after ordering a 29+ wheel set) so I'm trying to decide if that should go to a Bud for the front, and save the Barbegazzi I remove to replace the rear one at some point.
> 
> When it get's that sloppy though, that's when I won't be on the trail much if at all, so maybe I'll hold off on the Bud and ride the stock tires for a bit. Thanks for the input.


Yeah, depending on what up grades you have already got for your 7 besides the basics like pedals and different bars/grips. One of the best up grades i made so far is to get XT 8000 brakes. Does the 7 have Avids? I can't remember.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yep, getting a set of 2016 XT brakes and Ice Tech rotors is the first thing I did, then the extra wheel set. (along with more rotors)
That's why I'm sitting here with only $150 upgrade bucks left (actually in trade from a friend who owns a shop)


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

ck out Easton EC70 bars, also note some don't like the 70mm stock stem and go with a 60mm. I put a Thomson 60 on, I like it.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Thanks, I'd forgotten the stock stem was 70mm - might have to deal with that first.


----------



## TheTeesh (Feb 21, 2012)

Any one have recommendations for touch up paint? I already managed to get a few decent sized scratches on my 7 today. Otherwise I might consider putting a few tasteful stickers over the scratches.
Thanks


----------



## chesswiththedevil (Dec 23, 2015)

Why is it so hard to find a good professional review of the Farley 5? Is it too early?


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

chesswiththedevil said:


> Why is it so hard to find a good professional review of the Farley 5? Is it too early?


Putting their best foot forward- Usually the manufacturers pass around their higher end bikes for reviews (i.e. 9.8), and the bikes that most people buy get little or no press.

It is unfortunate as the people buying the lower priced bikes are usually scrapping together the money to buy them and really could use the insight.


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

I just want snow!!!!!

I can't get away from riding my Remedy when its hero dirt and 50* out here!


----------



## chesswiththedevil (Dec 23, 2015)

Paochow said:


> Putting their best foot forward- Usually the manufacturers pass around their higher end bikes for reviews (i.e. 9.8), and the bikes that most people buy get little or no press.
> 
> It is unfortunate as the people buying the lower priced bikes are usually scrapping together the money to buy them and really could use the insight.


Damn, well I guess that makes some sense. That being said, professional bloggers could demo one, write 800 words and literally be the only one on the internet. Low hanging fruit clicks in my opinion. Hmmmm....


----------



## glockrocket17 (Aug 26, 2015)

I got one of these today for Christmas


----------



## chesswiththedevil (Dec 23, 2015)

glockrocket17 said:


> I got one of these today for Christmas










Sweet bike homie!


----------



## glockrocket17 (Aug 26, 2015)

chesswiththedevil said:


> View attachment 1037855
> 
> Sweet bike homie!


Thanks! Can't wait to get it on some trails.


----------



## Fltrail (Jan 5, 2007)

I've been out of mountain biking for a few years and was looking to get back in, but started looking at fat bikes. Am I understanding it correct that you can put 27.5 or 29" wheelset on a 26" fat bike for some single track riding? If so it's like 2 bikes in one to me.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Fltrail said:


> I've been out of mountain biking for a few years and was looking to get back in, but started looking at fat bikes. Am I understanding it correct that you can put 27.5 or 29" wheelset on a 26" fat bike for some single track riding? If so it's like 2 bikes in one to me.


Yes this is true!! :thumbsup:


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Fltrail said:


> I've been out of mountain biking for a few years and was looking to get back in, but started looking at fat bikes. Am I understanding it correct that you can put 27.5 or 29" wheelset on a 26" fat bike for some single track riding? If so it's like 2 bikes in one to me.


This is true for most fat bike frames, however if you want to go with 29+ you need the rear sliding drop outs for them to fit. 27.5+ will fit with out sliding drop outs and they are very close to the same diameter as 26 x 4.

What I did was build up a Farley 5 Frame with a 26x4.7 wheel set and carbon fork for winter float, for summer I have a 27.5 x 3.8 wheel set and Bluto fork. I am too short to go with 29+ wheel set or that would have been my iorst choice. So I am 27.5 ++ LOL


----------



## Fltrail (Jan 5, 2007)

That brings me to my next question. What does a Farley 5 weigh?


----------



## Scads (Dec 7, 2015)

Question about the Farley 5 and a bluto -

I was out today with a friend that has a new Farley 5. Great bike, but he was asking me what would need to go into fixing it up with a Bluto and I have no idea. I'm also new to this whole fat bike thing. 

Would he need a new front wheel, I can't find much info, do the stock wheels that come with the Farley 5 fit on any fork?

Thanks for any responses.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Fltrail said:


> That brings me to my next question. What does a Farley 5 weigh?


Mine was about 15kg / 33lbs as it came from the shop with pedals and reflectors, etc. fitted.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Scads said:


> Question about the Farley 5 and a bluto -
> 
> I was out today with a friend that has a new Farley 5. Great bike, but he was asking me what would need to go into fixing it up with a Bluto and I have no idea. I'm also new to this whole fat bike thing.
> 
> ...


There may be spacer available I don't know for sure, but if so the front wheel may need to be re-dished to align the disc rotor too. The Bluto needs a 15MM thru axel. Or just buy a DT Swiss 150x15TA hub and re lace the front wheel and buy the bluto fork.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Scads said:


> Question about the Farley 5 and a bluto -
> 
> I was out today with a friend that has a new Farley 5. Great bike, but he was asking me what would need to go into fixing it up with a Bluto and I have no idea.
> 
> ...


I don't believe there is any "official" way to make the stock front wheel work with the bluto - a new hub is the cleanest way to do it. (I'm annoyed at Trek for this...)

There are ways to 'make it work' - the stock front wheel on *my* bike has a hub that will take a 15mm axle if the QR end caps are removed (they just pull off, but you might need to pull quite hard). It seems to be the same as the Farley 6 / 8 front wheel.

You would then need to get some new end caps machined up. The dimensions in this post would be spot on for my Farley 5 (I have checked).

You would then also need to space the disc rotor out by (ideally) 7.5mm using proprietary spacers and new bolts. (Alternatively, there are offset caliper mounts vailable (Hauck??)).

The end caps above are symmetrical, so there's no need to re-dish the wheel. I am intrigued to find out if the Salsa spacers will work with these wheels (they are assymmetric so there is no need to space the disc rotor out, but the wheel would need re-dishing by 7.5mm in this case).

It is all do-able, but not ideal.


----------



## fat_biike_boy (Dec 20, 2015)

*Agree, nothing official but it is possible...*

I got a Farley 5 for Christmas (thanks family!)... and before I get a new fork I wanted to prove out that making a new hub adapter would work. So on the Farley 6/8 forum there is a good diagram on the new hub... I took that drawing built it in TinkerCAD and then at 1am imported the stl file and sent it to my 3D printer. Too bad it is plastic and not a metal printer. And this morning I took off the wheel, put on the adapters and proved that the design will work on my Farley 5. I am going to find a machine shop that will make 10-20 of these for the Farley community. Anyone interested?


----------



## tpdietz (Apr 28, 2014)

All of a sudden, I drove by my LBS today and saw fat tire bikes on display. I know next to nothing about these toys. I went in on a whim and test rode a Farley 7. (I am one of the weirdo's who thinks the purple is cool) Came home and spent a long time reading the majority of this thread.

Naturally, there was only one thing left to do. I am happy to say I just placed an order for my own Farley 7! I will post pictures when she's ready.

I would like to thank all of you who have contributed to this thread. For if it wasn't for my mind living vicariously through your posts, reason would have surpassed desire and I would not have placed the order.

So thank you all for helping desire win!


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

tpdietz said:


> All of a sudden, I drove by my LBS today and saw fat tire bikes on display. I know next to nothing about these toys. I went in on a whim and test rode a Farley 7. (I am one of the weirdo's who thinks the purple is cool) Came home and spent a long time reading the majority of this thread.
> 
> Naturally, there was only one thing left to do. I am happy to say I just placed an order for my own Farley 7! I will post pictures when she's ready.
> 
> ...


Congrats on the new whip that is always a fun day!!


----------



## tpdietz (Apr 28, 2014)

tadraper said:


> Congrats on the new whip that is always a fun day!!


Thanks man!

On a side note, we might bump into each other in the near future. I live in Ann Arbor and believe I ride some of the same trails as you.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Very cool another local fat biker!!! Poto was in good shape today!


----------



## glockrocket17 (Aug 26, 2015)

Your going to love it. I got my first ride today on my 7 an yankee springs trail on the other side of the state.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Lmao all these Michigan fat bikers with no snow loving the bikes!!


----------



## SHowley2003 (Feb 21, 2008)

fat_biike_boy said:


> I got a Farley 5 for Christmas (thanks family!)... and before I get a new fork I wanted to prove out that making a new hub adapter would work. So on the Farley 6/8 forum there is a good diagram on the new hub... I took that drawing built it in TinkerCAD and then at 1am imported the stl file and sent it to my 3D printer. Too bad it is plastic and not a metal printer. And this morning I took off the wheel, put on the adapters and proved that the design will work on my Farley 5. I am going to find a machine shop that will make 10-20 of these for the Farley community. Anyone interested?
> 
> View attachment 1038054
> 
> ...


If you end up getting some caps count me in for a set. I should ignore this post as it will likely result in me ordering up a carbon fork for my F5. I'd love a thru axle though.


----------



## Polk (Jan 19, 2004)

tpdietz said:


> Thanks man!
> 
> On a side note, we might bump into each other in the near future. I live in Ann Arbor and believe I ride some of the same trails as you.


I also live in A2! I got a Farley 7 a couple weeks ago and have been very happy with it. It is replacing a Pugsley, and I am impressed at how much faster it feels.

FWIW, I put in 27 miles at Pinckney Rec. on Poto and other trails today.

I assume you went to Wheels In Motion?


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

fat_biike_boy said:


> ... the design will work on my Farley 5. I am going to find a machine shop that will make 10-20 of these for the Farley community. Anyone interested?


I would be, but I'm in the UK, and I assume you're in the US, so probably cheaper to get them made over here (I'd like to add the 'o' ring groove to the inside, too).

I'm not sure if the guy on the Farley 6/8 thread ended up getting a batch made?


----------



## tpdietz (Apr 28, 2014)

Polk said:


> I also live in A2! I got a Farley 7 a couple weeks ago and have been very happy with it. It is replacing a Pugsley, and I am impressed at how much faster it feels.
> 
> FWIW, I put in 27 miles at Pinckney Rec. on Poto and other trails today.
> 
> I assume you went to Wheels In Motion?


Thats awesome! Seems like there are a handful of locals with Farleys on these forums.

I cannot wait to get out to the Poto myself. Maybe there will even be some snow when I do.

Yup, I went to Wheels in Motion. Always nice to support local.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

fat_biike_boy said:


> I got a Farley 5 for Christmas (thanks family!)... and before I get a new fork I wanted to prove out that making a new hub adapter would work. So on the Farley 6/8 forum there is a good diagram on the new hub... I took that drawing built it in TinkerCAD and then at 1am imported the stl file and sent it to my 3D printer. Too bad it is plastic and not a metal printer. And this morning I took off the wheel, put on the adapters and proved that the design will work on my Farley 5. I am going to find a machine shop that will make 10-20 of these for the Farley community. Anyone interested?


Count me in. Would like to hear about a couple test rides, of course...


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

fat_biike_boy said:


> I got a Farley 5 for Christmas (thanks family!)... and before I get a new fork I wanted to prove out that making a new hub adapter would work. So on the Farley 6/8 forum there is a good diagram on the new hub... I took that drawing built it in TinkerCAD and then at 1am imported the stl file and sent it to my 3D printer. Too bad it is plastic and not a metal printer. And this morning I took off the wheel, put on the adapters and proved that the design will work on my Farley 5. I am going to find a machine shop that will make 10-20 of these for the Farley community. Anyone interested?
> 
> View attachment 1038054
> 
> ...


Have you checked that the brake rotor will be spaced correctly for the Bluto fork? I would assume that if you need to add spacers for the axle you will also need to space out the rotor.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

tpdietz said:


> I would like to thank all of you who have contributed to this thread. For if it wasn't for my mind living vicariously through your posts, reason would have surpassed desire and I would not have placed the order.
> 
> So thank you all for helping desire win!


Here's mine - a bit more eye candy for you.  XT brakes and Ice Tech rotors are the only upgrade. Soon to be converted to single speed.
You've made a great choice. A great, nimble bike - makes me wonder just how much I'll end up using the 29+ wheel set I have coming.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

JackP42 said:


> I would assume that if you need to add spacers for the axle you will also need to space out the rotor.


Correct.

Either the rotor needs spacing out by 7.5mm (ish) or an offset brake caliper adapter is needed with those spacers. I believe Hauck make a suitably offset adapter, but it only works with a 180mm disc rotor, so an new disc rotor would also be required. (The White Brothers Snowpack Adapter does not have sufficient offset to fully compensate for the spacers - 5mm vs 7.5mm, and also requires a 180mm rotor AFAIK)


----------



## JakeTurbo (Dec 28, 2015)

fat_biike_boy said:


> I got a Farley 5 for Christmas (thanks family!)... and before I get a new fork I wanted to prove out that making a new hub adapter would work. So on the Farley 6/8 forum there is a good diagram on the new hub... I took that drawing built it in TinkerCAD and then at 1am imported the stl file and sent it to my 3D printer. Too bad it is plastic and not a metal printer. And this morning I took off the wheel, put on the adapters and proved that the design will work on my Farley 5. I am going to find a machine shop that will make 10-20 of these for the Farley community. Anyone interested?
> 
> View attachment 1038054
> 
> ...


Looks good! 
How did you get the old end caps off? Tried several times but they seem fixed in place...


----------



## JakeTurbo (Dec 28, 2015)

Misterg said:


> Correct.
> 
> Either the rotor needs spacing out by 7.5mm (ish) or an offset brake caliper adapter is needed with those spacers. I believe Hauck make a suitably offset adapter, but it only works with a 180mm disc rotor, so an new disc rotor would also be required. (The White Brothers Snowpack Adapter does not have sufficient offset to fully compensate for the spacers - 5mm vs 7.5mm, and also requires a 180mm rotor AFAIK)


Hope make a brake spacer for their fatsno hub, wouldn't that be OK?


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

JakeTurbo said:


> Looks good!
> How did you get the old end caps off? Tried several times but they seem fixed in place...


Pull and wiggle - pull hard



JakeTurbo said:


> Hope make a brake spacer for their fatsno hub, wouldn't that be OK?


I think so (based on its intended purpose - I can't find a dimension for it) - I don't know if it is available separately from the rest of the conversion kit, either.


----------



## tpdietz (Apr 28, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> Here's mine - a bit more eye candy for you.  XT brakes and Ice Tech rotors are the only upgrade. Soon to be converted to single speed.
> You've made a great choice. A great, nimble bike - makes me wonder just how much I'll end up using the 29+ wheel set I have coming.


What a beauty! Thanks for sharing. Since placing my order, I'm finding it hard to think of anything but fatties! I'm hoping to have her in my clutches by 1/7.

I was also thinking about picking up an additional wheel set, but with all the choices available, I need to research more. After you get some rides in, I'd definitely be curious how you think the stock set up compares to the 29+.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

*just got it?*



Gambit21 said:


> Here's mine - a bit more eye candy for you.  XT brakes and Ice Tech rotors are the only upgrade. Soon to be converted to single speed.
> You've made a great choice. A great, nimble bike - makes me wonder just how much I'll end up using the 29+ wheel set I have coming.


You just got that didn't you? Hows that 70mm stem for you? Since i am headed to Florida for a few months soon, I am converting mine to 27.5x3.8 and Bluto tomorrow. Theres no snow around here to worry about float anymore.


----------



## mic360 (May 4, 2015)

How easy is it to take off the front wheel on the 7? I transport the bike inside my car and have only had a bike with quick release. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## glockrocket17 (Aug 26, 2015)

It's easy just unscrew the axle and pull it out.


----------



## fat_biike_boy (Dec 20, 2015)

Misterg said:


> Correct.
> 
> Either the rotor needs spacing out by 7.5mm (ish) or an offset brake caliper adapter is needed with those spacers. I believe Hauck make a suitably offset adapter, but it only works with a 180mm disc rotor, so an new disc rotor would also be required. (The White Brothers Snowpack Adapter does not have sufficient offset to fully compensate for the spacers - 5mm vs 7.5mm, and also requires a 180mm rotor AFAIK)


Yes, going to tackle the hub and then onto the brake adapter. The White Brothers adapter looks like it might work..


----------



## fat_biike_boy (Dec 20, 2015)

These would be made in the USA from 6061 Aluminum. Modified the design from the forum on pg 9 (Farley 6/8) with an internal o-ring gasket.

What is the preference on the finish? 
(option 1) Aluminum with a protective clear coat or 
(option 2) Black finish? If anodize, that coating adds about $10 to the set cost. 

This first batch of adapters will probably be about $38 (for a set of 2), plus shipping (without black finish coat). What are people thinking? Feedback? Would like to gauge interest before making a large quantity to get bulk pricing. Does not include a brake adapter.


----------



## JakeTurbo (Dec 28, 2015)

Will the bluto's be OK with the barbegazzi 4.7" tyres clearance wise?


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> Here's mine - a bit more eye candy for you.  XT brakes and Ice Tech rotors are the only upgrade. Soon to be converted to single speed.
> You've made a great choice. A great, nimble bike - makes me wonder just how much I'll end up using the 29+ wheel set I have coming.


Looks great! Glad you finally got your bike- the waiting would have killed me!


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

JakeTurbo said:


> Will the bluto's be OK with the barbegazzi 4.7" tyres clearance wise?


Yes


----------



## JakeTurbo (Dec 28, 2015)

Paochow said:


> Yes


Good news!


----------



## JakeTurbo (Dec 28, 2015)

fat_biike_boy said:


> These would be made in the USA from 6061 Aluminum. Modified the design from the forum on pg 9 (Farley 6/8) with an internal o-ring gasket.
> 
> What is the preference on the finish?
> (option 1) Aluminum with a protective clear coat or
> ...


Any idea what the turnaround time would be? Also would you ship to the UK?

Will be fitting a 150mm hope fatsno unless I can get some spacers quickly as I've got a bluto turning up tomorrow!


----------



## fat_biike_boy (Dec 20, 2015)

JakeTurbo said:


> Any idea what the turnaround time would be? Also would you ship to the UK?
> 
> Will be fitting a 150mm hope fatsno unless I can get some spacers quickly as I've got a bluto turning up tomorrow!


----------
It will take about 22 days for them to be made and 3 days for shipping.. so figure about 4 weeks. yes, I would ship to the UK... the timing doesn't seem to work for you though. Have fun with the new Bluto.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Paochow said:


> Looks great! Glad you finally got your bike- the waiting would have killed me!


I almost did kill me!


----------



## Robg68 (Oct 27, 2013)

fat_biike_boy said:


> These would be made in the USA from 6061 Aluminum. Modified the design from the forum on pg 9 (Farley 6/8) with an internal o-ring gasket.
> 
> What is the preference on the finish?
> (option 1) Aluminum with a protective clear coat or
> ...


I'd say aluminum with clear coat. I also would be interested in a set of these. I see your from Illinois, me too, I live about 60 miles south of Chicago.


----------



## JakeTurbo (Dec 28, 2015)

fat_biike_boy said:


> ----------
> It will take about 22 days for them to be made and 3 days for shipping.. so figure about 4 weeks. yes, I would ship to the UK... the timing doesn't seem to work for you though. Have fun with the new Bluto.


Yep that's a bit too long for me. If I was more patient that would be ideal though!


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

I have a Farley 5 and just got the Farley 9.6. The 5 will be used by my finacee. I am in grand haven area of MI we just got some heavy corn snow that is really hard to ride on. It has melted a bit. I got a chance to ride them back to back for a short time. The 9.6 27.5X4 rolled better through this stuff than the 26X5. The 9.6 was more manageable. In some areas the 9.6 stayed on top of snow. I had both bikes tires at 7psi front and back. Both chainstays all the way back and bikes are same size. I am so stoked with the 9.6 set up !


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

That makes sense for melted snow - just wait.


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

just wait for what ... more snow ?


----------



## tpdietz (Apr 28, 2014)

aquamogal said:


> I have a Farley 5 and just got the Farley 9.6. The 5 will be used by my finacee. I am in grand haven area of MI we just got some heavy corn snow that is really hard to ride on. It has melted a bit. I got a chance to ride them back to back for a short time. The 9.6 27.5X4 rolled better through this stuff than the 26X5. The 9.6 was more manageable. In some areas the 9.6 stayed on top of snow. I had both bikes tires at 7psi front and back. Both chainstays all the way back and bikes are same size. I am so stoked with the 9.6 set up !


Thanks for that info!

Aside from the tire differences, did you notice any other worth while differences in the two bikes? I suspect the carbon bike would be at least a lb or more lighter. Was this noticeable in the snow?


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

chesswiththedevil said:


> Why is it so hard to find a good professional review of the Farley 5? Is it too early?


Jeez, 42 pages here of info complete with weights, photos, real world comparos and measured minutiae not enough for ya? If you rate a glossy mag review above MTBR, you might be waiting a while, as it's not the "hero/halo" bike of the range. PM me if there's any particular detail you'd like.


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

faster, lighter, better components ect. I have a 1X10 on the 5 with 42 wolftooth. I really like the Sram 1X11 in many ways better on 9.6. If you have an extra 1500 bucks go for it !


----------



## midschool22 (Apr 13, 2012)

Swapped out the stock Barbegazi for the skinnier Rougarou. Saved almost a pound. Sweet tires.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

For anyone interested, I'm finding 5psi rear, 4 psi front with the Barbegazi tires is ideal for rocks, roots, singletrack. Anything too much more and I get bounced around, but 5/4 seems to be a sweet spot. I weigh just over 200 all geared up.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> For anyone interested, I'm finding 5psi rear, 4 psi front with the Barbegazi tires is ideal for rocks, roots, singletrack. Anything too much more and I get bounced around, but 5/4 seems to be a sweet spot. I weigh just over 200 all geared up.


Bluto


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Oh man - it feels so good without the Bluto. A this point I don't have any reason to add the weight or spend the money. Also I used up my upgrade budget on a set of 29+ (DT Swiss hubs). When I get the 29+ on there for Summer riding I'll re-evaluate.
With those stock tires though, they pretty much negate the need for a suspension fork for any riding I'll be doing.

I'm also the guy who doesn't mind being able to detect that I just went over a rock or root, and likes to feel the trail a bit.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> Oh man - it feels so good without the Bluto. A this point I don't have any reason to add the weight or spend the money. Also I used up my upgrade budget on a set of 29+ (DT Swiss hubs). When I get the 29+ on there for Summer riding I'll re-evaluate.
> With those stock tires though, they pretty much negate the need for a suspension fork for any riding I'll be doing.
> 
> I'm also the guy who doesn't mind being able to detect that I just went over a rock or root, and likes to feel the trail a bit.


You can fight it my friend- I did for awhile, ignorance is bliss. But once you switch, your tire psi can be set for max speed and grip and the terrain disappears.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Paochow said:


> You can fight it my friend- I did for awhile, ignorance is bliss. But once you switch, your tire psi can be set for max speed and grip and the terrain disappears.


I have been running 10/10, are you suggesting lower pressure will yield a more desirable ride?

Faster?

Thanks!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Paochow said:


> You can fight it my friend- I did for awhile, ignorance is bliss. But once you switch, your tire psi can be set for max speed and grip and the terrain disappears.


Yeah - I've gone from rigid to sus fork before. First time was in 94 on my Stumpjumper.
I'll see what develops, but for now I'm happy. Suspension vs rigid is like sailboat vs motorboat. Sailboat is still good if that's you're thing. I don't want the terrain to disappear - but that doesn't mean that I also don't appreciate what a suspension fork brings to the table. We shall see. First a better squishy fork needs to show up, and it can't be $800.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

LunchRider said:


> I have been running 10/10, are you suggesting lower pressure will yield a more desirable ride?
> 
> Faster?
> 
> ...


Lower pressure will generally give a cushier ride, however rolling resistance will also start to increase. If you get too low you also have to worry about rim damage when you hit sharp edged obstacles, especially if you have carbon wheels.

On a rigid bike, you want to find the sweet spot where you have a balance of a smooth ride, minimal rolling resistance, and not too much pressure where the bike bucks you off when you hit something. A few psi can really make a difference, so the best thing to do is take your gauge and a pump out on the trail and experiment.


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

^^^ this. on my 9.8 i find 8front/6rear to be the sweetspot. i am 155lbs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I am 185 and run 10/10. I notice that I will get a bounce while pedaling if I am in too low of a gear for the terrain. One click higher and I get a much smoother ride.

I also have the rigid 9.8.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

i probably could go lower up front but even at 8psi, i could notice that the tire would have a mind of its own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jtc1 (Apr 13, 2004)

Thinking of a 9.8 any day (one available at LBS) - but concerned about wheels/tires. For those that have ridden on packed snow (Minnesota/WI xc trail stuff) - are the tires providing enough grip? Looking to upgrade from my first gen Mukluk (have Dillnger studded 26x4's on that bike). 

Thanks!!


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

jtc1 said:


> Thinking of a 9.8 any day (one available at LBS) - but concerned about wheels/tires. For those that have ridden on packed snow (Minnesota/WI xc trail stuff) - are the tires providing enough grip? Looking to upgrade from my first gen Mukluk (have Dillnger studded 26x4's on that bike).
> 
> Thanks!!


I have a 9.8 I bought this year. I live in Minnesota and ride on both the snow trails and the beaches around here.

I spent a lot of time looking into the 27.5x4 vs the 26x5 formats and was convinced after that study that the 27.5x4 offers considerable advantages in most conditions except in very deep new snow. That pretty much turned out to be correct - there is more float than with a 26x4 by a fair amount (subjective, based on test rides) and the rolling efficiency is better when you things like foot divots in sand or snow/ice. I would say that the 27.5x4 format is much closer to the 26x5 format for tire patch size than it is to the 26x4 and then you get the rolling efficiency benefits.

I rode most of the fall on sand beaches (I have about a 6-10 mile loop that I can do along the St. Croix River) and I've not had any issues going up and down the river on the sand (in fact, it's been a blast). Since the snow showed up, I've been riding around on the snow and the only time I had any issues was with the latest 6-8" snowfall we had but once it firmed up, I was able to ride in day or two old snowmobile tracks. Groomed and packed trails would be just fine. I was able to ride over the old frozen crusty snow below (i.e. like styrofoam).

Here's a link to a podcast where Trek engineers and product managers talk about the research they did on the wheel format and why it works well. I found what they say to be true.

With respect to grip, while I'm not an expert on tires, I've not had them slip pretty much at all. They seem to penetrate packed snow and packed sand well. I did have them studded after the snow formed and that has been good on the ice.

So my guidance is if you are riding on the groomed snow, should be no problem other than you would find when you hit embedded ice. I think there are substantial advantages to the 27.5"x4 format over the 26"x5 in a very wide range of conditions. On packed/groomed conditions, the 27.5x4 would be superior.

J.


----------



## jtc1 (Apr 13, 2004)

JohnJ80 said:


> I have a 9.8 I bought this year. I live in Minnesota and ride on both the snow trails and the beaches around here.
> 
> I spent a lot of time looking into the 27.5x4 vs the 26x5 formats and was convinced after that study that the 27.5x4 offers considerable advantages in most conditions except in very deep new snow. That pretty much turned out to be correct - there is more float than with a 26x4 by a fair amount (subjective, based on test rides) and the rolling efficiency is better when you things like foot divots in sand or snow/ice. I would say that the 27.5x4 format is much closer to the 26x5 format for tire patch size than it is to the 26x4 and then you get the rolling efficiency benefits.
> 
> ...


Excellent feedback. I'm going to go for a ride on the lake and listen to the podcast.

Funny - I'm in the St Croix Valley as well. Let
Me know if you recommend a dealer for the 9.8. I'll also need to hear about your 6 mile route.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

jtc1 said:


> Thinking of a 9.8 any day (one available at LBS) - but concerned about wheels/tires. For those that have ridden on packed snow (Minnesota/WI xc trail stuff) - are the tires providing enough grip? Looking to upgrade from my first gen Mukluk (have Dillnger studded 26x4's on that bike).
> 
> Thanks!!


I'd definitely recommend riding it first if at all possible. I've had a chance to ride the 9.6 and 9.8 on the snow a few times now and really haven't been very impressed with the 27.5 Hodag in the snow. Compared to a good 26" tire like the Vanhelga, it doesn't grip any where near as well and seems to roll about the same.

I definitely didn't notice any "substantial" advantages over a 26x5" tire or even over a 26"x4" tire. At best it has some subtle advantages and also it's share of disadvantages. For me it wasn't worth the substantial investment to buy a tire/wheel combo that only has one tire option, when for $250 I could buy a set of Vanhelga's that outperform them in most snow conditions.

There isn't a whole lot of reviews on the bike, aside from the always positive industry reviews, but here are a few I'd read before jumping in....

Carbon beauty meets a single-track beast ? Get to know the Trek Farley 9.8 | FAT-BIKE.COM

Impression on 27.5" Fat Bike Wheels | brokenspokebikes


----------



## jtc1 (Apr 13, 2004)

Paochow said:


> I'd definitely recommend riding it first if at all possible. I've had a chance to ride the 9.6 and 9.8 on the snow a few times now and really haven't been very impressed with the 27.5 Hodag in the snow. Compared to a good 26" tire like the Vanhelga, it doesn't grip any where near as well and seems to roll about the same.
> 
> I definitely didn't notice any "substantial" advantages over a 26x5" tire or even over a 26"x4" tire. At best it has some subtle advantages and also it's share of disadvantages. For me it wasn't worth the substantial investment to buy a tire/wheel combo that only has one tire option, when for $250 I could buy a set of Vanhelga's that outperform them in most snow conditions.
> 
> ...


Thanks! I should have added I'm comparing the 9.8 to a Beargrease. I can get a deal on the black/orange Beargrease from '15. My concern there is the weird / proprietary hub spacing. I would probably build that with the Hed 85 carbon 26" wheels. (Can't seem to warm to the pink/purple 2016 Beargrease colors).


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

jtc1 said:


> Thanks! I should have added I'm comparing the 9.8 to a Beargrease. I can get a deal on the black/orange Beargrease from '15. My concern there is the weird / proprietary hub spacing. I would probably build that with the Hed 85 carbon 26" wheels. (Can't seem to warm to the pink/purple 2016 Beargrease colors).


Depends what you want to do with the front hub, Salsa sells a conversion kit for $25 to switch it from 142mm to 150mm if you are looking at adding a Bluto. If you are looking at upgrading, many companies either offer a 142 hub or a way to convert it. Either is cheaper than buying a set of 26" wheels for a 9.8.

Are you looking at a 2015 Beargrease XX1? If so it already should have the Whisky Carbon rims which are very nice, stiff, and durable and about 350gr lighter than a set of 27.5 Wampas. You might save about 1/4# switching to HED's, but at $2800 a pound it is a pretty expensive way to shave weight.


----------



## jtc1 (Apr 13, 2004)

Paochow said:


> Depends what you want to do with the front hub, Salsa sells a conversion kit for $25 to switch it from 142mm to 150mm if you are looking at adding a Bluto. If you are looking at upgrading, many companies either offer a 142 hub or a way to convert it. Either is cheaper than buying a set of 26" wheels for a 9.8.
> 
> Are you looking at a 2015 Beargrease XX1? If so it already should have the Whisky Carbon rims which are very nice, stiff, and durable and about 350gr lighter than a set of 27.5 Wampas. You might save about 1/4# switching to HED's, but at $2800 a pound it is a pretty expensive way to shave weight.


I was able to find a deal on frame, fork, hubs kit for 15 Beargrease. But became concerned about the non standard hub spacing. 
I really like the 9.8 - but I will be using it for winter only...and it seems (could be wrong here) a few compromises have been made to make it a warm weather bike as well as a snow bike. namely around tires/wheels. Looking for a fast xc winter bike .... and I think both are top contenders.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

midschool22 said:


> Swapped out the stock Barbegazi for the skinnier Rougarou. Saved almost a pound. Sweet tires.


I like. What sort of terrain are you riding on?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TheFatrTheBetr (Jan 1, 2016)

New to the forum and new to fatbikes, but a seasoned rider. Picked up a Farley 5 about four weeks ago. Swapped the stock bars for a flat bar with some ergon GS-2 grips. Has anyone upgraded their fork to carbon aftermarket fork with 15 TA? If so, what adapters did you use and where did you get them? Thanks for the help.


----------



## jasonhardingmt (Jan 3, 2016)

Howdy Farleyphiles!, 
1st time post for me but I've been the recipient of a lot of great information through this site. Thanks to all of you contributors.

So my question is about the Bontrager Haru Pro Fatbike Fork:
In it's spec list it says that it accommodates up to a 26 x 4.8 or a 27.5 x 3

" -Full OCLV Carbon construction with tapered 1-1/8 -1.5" headtube
51mm offset
-Accepts Post Mount brakes, up to 210mm max rotor size
-490mm axle-to-crown length, fits up to 26 x 4.8" or 27.5 x 3.0" tires
-Includes 150x15mm thru axle and carbon compression steerer plug
-Carbon Armor replaceable dropout guards"

My question is: Is the Bontrager Haru Pro Fatbike Fork REALLY only capable of fitting a 27.5 x 3" tire? My fiancé is waiting for her Farley 9 and is thinking it'd be nice to have it set up rigid for winter. I would think that a fork capable of 26 x 4.8", would be able to accommodate a 27.5 x 3.8"... or even a 29 x 3" for Summer 29+ fun.

Can anybody verify if this is a misprint? It'd be so simple to keep everything stock and just swap the fork; rigid for winter and back to the Bluto when it thaws. 

Thank you,
Jason


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

It accommodates all sizes.


----------



## mkdiehl (Dec 30, 2014)

Sparky697 said:


> I'd go with one of the boost 29+ forks available over a Bluto any day. You'll need a new hub but would be way better. Save the large/rigid combo for winter and run suspension /29+ the other 3 seasons.
> 
> Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk


Bringing this back as i start my shopping in earnest.....

What advantage is a boost 29+ over a Bluto?
My thinking is that i can build a 150mm 35-40mm 29+ wheel and try it rigid to see if i can take it in the summer. If it proves to be too rough for my trails, I can just add a bluto.
Your route leaves me no ability to run 29+ rigid if i choose (from a racing/weight perspective).
Also, it appears that the DT Swiss 350's won't accept my 9.8 1x11 right?

thanks
matt


----------



## Sparky697 (Feb 10, 2015)

It's just a much better fork. Stiffer. Bluto isn't bad but if you would ask most owners they would happily upgrade to a fat Pike or similar Fox. The downfall of the Fox + is that once you commit you're stuck because of hub size. I'd be building new wheels anyway so I could keep current ones for winter and swap out for other 3 seasons. 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> For anyone interested, I'm finding 5psi rear, 4 psi front with the Barbegazi tires is ideal for rocks, roots, singletrack. Anything too much more and I get bounced around, but 5/4 seems to be a sweet spot. I weigh just over 200 all geared up.


this is ideal for my 150-160lbs winter weight fat self on snowy-icy conditions.

dry conditions I go 8psi

*for FARLEY 7 OWNERS:
*
Have you found grips that matches the blue Trek logo or accents?

I thought the KCNC Foam grips would match it but it's a bit too light. Does the OURY ones match it?

for* FARLEY OWNERS:*

which downtube fender are you using?


----------



## Robg68 (Oct 27, 2013)

jasonhardingmt said:


> Howdy Farleyphiles!,
> 1st time post for me but I've been the recipient of a lot of great information through this site. Thanks to all of you contributors.
> 
> So my question is about the Bontrager Haru Pro Fatbike Fork:
> ...


With the 27.5 X 3" tire. The actual tire is a lot wider than 3", maybe someone on this forum that has this tire size can tell you how wide the tire really is. These goofy tire sizes are confusing.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

The query has been answered.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

KantoBoy said:


> this is ideal for my 150-160lbs winter weight fat self on snowy-icy conditions.
> 
> dry conditions I go 8psi
> 
> ...












These dmr grips are the closest ive found if your blue is the same as the 6.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

To the guy who asked about a detailed Farley 5 review....I plan on writing one on this forum when I get the chance as I've had it out on quite a few rides now in various conditions except heavy snow. We don't get much here :-(

A couple of observations I've made recently. I'm not used to riding a rigid bike so the Farley 5 (even with those massive tyres came as something of a shock). The first thing I noticed is you do tend to get a fair bit of vibration on an AL fork....particularly if you take it on road. At higher speeds the tyres will buzz loudly and this filters up the fork. I'm going to replace the stock grips with SDG Han Solos which should help. Also, when beach riding it's best to not even go near the brakes...I find that once sand gets trapped in calipers the scraping and vibration can drive you nuts until it's clear.

On that note, I've noticed for the first time ever I've got rust already on the "spokes" of the disc rotors. I can only assume this has been caused by salt water getting on the discs and running down them. Anyone else get this? What's best method to remove it...some wirewool/sandpaper? I would avoid putting any kind of rust remover on discs even if it's not on the actual rotor contact area.

PSI- bike came with them @ 20psi...this seems to be standard with these bikes. I started running them at 15 as I was mostly on fireroad and then 12, when I mix road/fireroad and some single track. However, as most people find, I keep going lower. For standard red/black trails in UK im going with 8 PSI front and 10 PSI rear. Still tubed here so wanting to avoid pinchflats or rim damage. Have done a few beach rides at 12psi but I know I could easily halve that number.

Will write up a bit more when I get a chance. Anyone fitting one of those Lauf Carbonara forks to a 5? I love the look of them but damn they are expensive!


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

I test fitted my 27.5+ wheels on the carbon fork and had no Issues. I will see if I can find someone with a 29+ wheel so we can see if it fits.

Personally after riding 27.5+ I see no reason for the 29+ as the bike is a rocket with the 27.5+ wheels.



jasonhardingmt said:


> Howdy Farleyphiles!,
> 1st time post for me but I've been the recipient of a lot of great information through this site. Thanks to all of you contributors.
> 
> So my question is about the Bontrager Haru Pro Fatbike Fork:
> ...


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Also, when beach riding it's best to not even go near the brakes...I find that once sand gets trapped in calipers the scraping and vibration can drive you nuts until it's clear.


I do a lot of riding on the beach and had the same problem. The tires seem to dump a fair amount of sand on the brake calipers primarily in the rear. I largely solved the problem by putting a piece of duct tape over the openings on the front of the brake to prevent the sand from falling. This almost completely eliminated the problem. To fix it, once sand did become entrapped was simply to pull the pad and re-install the pad. I have a 9.8 so the brakes are different, but I'd bet the same fix would work.



> On that note, I've noticed for the first time ever I've got rust already on the "spokes" of the disc rotors. I can only assume this has been caused by salt water getting on the discs and running down them. Anyone else get this? What's best method to remove it...some wirewool/sandpaper? I would avoid putting any kind of rust remover on discs even if it's not on the actual rotor contact area.
> 
> PSI- bike came with them @ 20psi...this seems to be standard with these bikes. I started running them at 15 as I was mostly on fireroad and then 12, when I mix road/fireroad and some single track. However, as most people find, I keep going lower. For standard red/black trails in UK im going with 8 PSI front and 10 PSI rear. Still tubed here so wanting to avoid pinchflats or rim damage. Have done a few beach rides at 12psi but I know I could easily halve that number.


I've been riding on the sand at about 7-8psi and it's been fine on the 27.5x4 tires.



> Will write up a bit more when I get a chance. Anyone fitting one of those Lauf Carbonara forks to a 5? I love the look of them but damn they are expensive!


I too was interested in these forks. I don't believe they have a lock out, do they?

J.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

JohnJ80 said:


> I do a lot of riding on the beach and had the same problem. The tires seem to dump a fair amount of sand on the brake calipers primarily in the rear. I largely solved the problem by putting a piece of duct tape over the openings on the front of the brake to prevent the sand from falling. This almost completely eliminated the problem. To fix it, once sand did become entrapped was simply to pull the pad and re-install the pad. I have a 9.8 so the brakes are different, but I'd bet the same fix would work.
> 
> I've been riding on the sand at about 7-8psi and it's been fine on the 27.5x4 tires.
> 
> ...


cheers! May give that a go. Yep the Carbonara don't have a lockout as far as I know but they don't need it. The glassfibre springs are designed to soak up hits but not compress on climbs. I like the "zero maintenance" aspect of them....but at £750 a set in the UK the only way I am going to get a set is if Lauf send me them to demo for free....  I can dream. I mean...I just bought a Giant Defy 0 FOR £700 so like £750 is a ridiculous price for a fork. If I ran/maintained only 1 or 2 bikes I might consider it...but I have 4 running and another in pieces so will wait until Lauf bring their fork down to the £200 mark.


----------



## midschool22 (Apr 13, 2012)

hoboscratch said:


> I like. What sort of terrain are you riding on?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Pavement to hardpack. Mostly used as a commuter when the snow finally sticks. Will occasionally use on the trails which is hardback single track.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Way2ManyBikes said:


> I test fitted my 27.5+ wheels on the carbon fork and had no Issues. I will see if I can find someone with a 29+ wheel so we can see


THEY FIT.
This isn't hard.
There is only a few mm difference in outer diameter.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

JohnJ80 said:


> The tires seem to dump a fair amount of sand on the brake calipers primarily in the rear. I largely solved the problem by putting a piece of duct tape over the openings on the front of the brake to prevent the sand from falling. This almost completely eliminated the problem. To fix it, once sand did become entrapped was simply to pull the pad and re-install the pad. I have a 9.8 so the brakes are different, but I'd bet the same fix would work.


Excellent tip, thanks - I'll have to try that as I also get 'scratchy discs'.

We have some very soft sand here (even walking on it, you sink to your ankles), but I'm down to about 4.5 PSI on the Barbegazis and just float over the top. (I try and keep things cleaned and lubed, but I hate to think what the longer term consequences for the drivetrain are!)

If/when I get rust staining on the disc rotors, I'd take them off the bike and dip them in automotive rust remover (note *remover* not *stabiliser* or *converter*) - I may even try vinegar or coca cola first. The rotors are stainless, and not a lot can hurt them, but I would keep potions away from the rest of the bike. [Edit: to clarify, I mean the one piece rotors that are o/e on the Farley 5. I wouldn't do this with fancy floating or ice-tech, etc. rotors]


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Misterg said:


> Excellent tip, thanks - I'll have to try that as I also get 'scratchy discs'.
> 
> We have some very soft sand here (even walking on it, you sink to your ankles), but I'm down to about 4.5 PSI on the Barbegazis and just float over the top. (I try and keep things cleaned and lubed, but I hate to think what the longer term consequences for the drivetrain are!)
> 
> If/when I get rust staining on the disc rotors, I'd take them off the bike and dip them in automotive rust remover (note *remover* not *stabiliser* or *converter*) - I may even try vinegar or coca cola first. The rotors are stainless, and not a lot can hurt them, but I would keep potions away from the rest of the bike.


Just took a piece of medium coarse sandpaper to them tonight & rust came off easy. Didn't even have to remove the disc to get at them. I've been quite surprised about how little sand has ended up in my drivetrain. I would normally hose down, dry & lube after a beach ride but the Barbs seem to shed sand & muck quite well. In fact I can't remember riding a tyre that clears dirt so well. Coulpled with the BB height & small chainrings the bike is quite well designed for clearing all sorts of terrain.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Misterg said:


> Excellent tip, thanks - I'll have to try that as I also get 'scratchy discs'.
> 
> We have some very soft sand here (even walking on it, you sink to your ankles), but I'm down to about 4.5 PSI on the Barbegazis and just float over the top. (I try and keep things cleaned and lubed, but I hate to think what the longer term consequences for the drivetrain are!)
> 
> If/when I get rust staining on the disc rotors, I'd take them off the bike and dip them in automotive rust remover (note *remover* not *stabiliser* or *converter*) - I may even try vinegar or coca cola first. The rotors are stainless, and not a lot can hurt them, but I would keep potions away from the rest of the bike.


The sand we have is these really pointy squarish crystals that have played havoc with everything that comes in contact with it - boats, windsurfers, furniture, and now bike brakes. So I'm not surprised it was a problem. What happens is that sand falls on top of the pads and then gets between the pads and the hydraulic cylinders eventually packing in there and preventing the pads from retracting. Pull the pads out and it clears out and you're good again.

Keeping the sand out is the trick. The tires pick up the sand and seem to release it in such a way that makes it fall straight into the ventilation openings on the brakes on the 9.8. Covering them up with a piece of duct tape did the trick, but it would have to come off if you were doing a lot of braking (i.e. long descent) in order get enough airflow to cool the pads and rotors. Obviously that is of little concern on the flat and on sand where you could probably could get by without brakes at all. And you are not going to get the mass quantity of sand on a long descent unless you are biking on some serious sand dunes.  So the problem is unique to beach riding and easily handled.

J.


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> A couple of observations I've made recently. I'm not used to riding a rigid bike so the Farley 5 (even with those massive tyres came as something of a shock). The first thing I noticed is you do tend to get a fair bit of vibration on an AL fork....particularly if you take it on road. At higher speeds the tyres will buzz loudly and this filters up the fork. I'm going to replace the stock grips with SDG Han Solos which should help. Also, when beach riding it's best to not even go near the brakes...I find that once sand gets trapped in calipers the scraping and vibration can drive you nuts until it's clear.
> 
> PSI- bike came with them @ 20psi...this seems to be standard with these bikes. I started running them at 15 as I was mostly on fireroad and then 12, when I mix road/fireroad and some single track. However, as most people find, I keep going lower. For standard red/black trails in UK im going with 8 PSI front and 10 PSI rear. Still tubed here so wanting to avoid pinchflats or rim damage. Have done a few beach rides at 12psi but I know I could easily halve that number.


It's a bit spooky reading your post because it's pretty much exactly what I was writing when I got my Farley 6, I found the rigid hard going on my wrists and started looking at carbon bars (bought but never fitted), carbon forks and a Bluto. The fix however was when a local veteran fat biker lowered the pressure on my tyres, I was running 8/10 psi front/rear but he dropped them way down and it's much more comfortable and grippy. There is a bit more self steer and more rolling resistance but it handles rough surface much better.

I'm around 60kg so I can get away with pretty small tyre pressures but also I find most pressure gauges (particularly the ones on track pumps) are hugely inaccurate for the low fat bike pressures so if you're not using a decent gauge you may find you're not running as low as you think.

John


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yeah cr3anmachin3 you're riding at silly high pressures.
I don't need to go above 5 even for pavement, definitely no higher than 7.
Off road on the Barbs I'm at 5/5 or even 5/4, and that's on dry single track.
For a pavement ride I wouldn't bother with anything higher than 7, but likely never even that high.


----------



## Robg68 (Oct 27, 2013)

KantoBoy said:


> this is ideal for my 150-160lbs winter weight fat self on snowy-icy conditions.
> 
> dry conditions I go 8psi
> 
> ...











I use Easton double lock on grips. They come in 2 different thickness of rubber. I got the thicker ones and they work and look great.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> Yeah cr3anmachin3 you're riding at silly high pressures.
> I don't need to go above 5 even for pavement, definitely no higher than 7.
> Off road on the Barbs I'm at 5/5 or even 5/4, and that's on dry single track.
> For a pavement ride I wouldn't bother with anything higher than 7, but likely never even that high.


Thanks John & Gambit21. Yes, beginning to realise I can go much lower with tyre pressure. I'm just worried about getting pinch flats until I go tubeless. I was VERY unlucky on my first Farley 5 ride. I went out on a wet cold day with target of doing 30miles+ of single track, coastal path, fireroad. At up 17 miles I got a puncture in the front and pulled 3 thorns outta the Barbs. Was running them at 12psi. Was too cold and wet to attempt my first puncture repair and I had no spare tube so got a lift home...and glad I did as the effort required to get that tyre of the first time was....exceptional. Ordered 3 spare tubes the next day.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

midschool22 said:


> Swapped out the stock Barbegazi for the skinnier Rougarou. Saved almost a pound. Sweet tires.


Might give these a go as my next tyre. How much and where from pls? Anyone try running the On-one tyres on their bikes? Any opinions on them?
On-One Floater Fat Tyre | On - One

On-One Floater 120TPI Folding Tyre | On - One


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> Yeah cr3anmachin3 you're riding at silly high pressures.
> I don't need to go above 5 even for pavement, definitely no higher than 7.
> Off road on the Barbs I'm at 5/5 or even 5/4, and that's on dry single track.
> For a pavement ride I wouldn't bother with anything higher than 7, but likely never even that high.


My experience is completely different. Got the bike in October. I am just now getting some snow time and learning that 6 to 7 is too high but have not had a chance to go lower so I can't comment on my preferred PSI on snow.

What I do know, for me, is that less than 10 psi on pavement makes me weep. 12+ is my go to. The drag created below 10 is significant and there is no upside to running lower.

On dirt single track I like 10ish. A bit of bounce occasionally but I am trying to go fast, not slog through on mushy tires. Lower psi might be more "cushy" but I would be slower for sure.

My biggest problem now is airing back up after a snow trail ride to get home on pavement. Ride really slow with 5 psi or take 10 minutes to put 400 pumps of air into my tires? Decisions Decisions.......

YMMV


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

I've been running my tyres ridiculously low (2 psi front and 4 psi back according to my digital tyre pressure gauge) and I wasn't too worried about punctures as I carry a spare around with me. I've been very lucky and not had a single puncture but I didn't realise how hard it is to get the tyre off so I've brought my tyres up a little in pressure (even a single psi makes a big difference), I am worried though about an upcoming 24 hour race but I guess there's not much I can do.

John


----------



## tyrone.minton (Feb 15, 2010)

*Trek Came Through on the Warranty Replacement*

So as I mentioned a right before Xmas, my 2 day old, less than 10 miles on the Odo, 9.6 frame cracked. I just got the call from the LBS that my new frame was in and the bike was ready to be picked up. What I wasn't expecting to hear was that there were no 9.6 frames available so I was upgraded to a 9.8 frame and fork. I included pics from the day I picked it up, a couple from the one ride I got in on it at Virginia Key here in Miami, as well as the crack so you can all double check your carbon frames in this location! I'll post pics of the new bike as soon as I can get it out on the dirt!

Pedal on!!


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

tyrone.minton said:


> So as I mentioned a right before Xmas, my 2 day old, less than 10 miles on the Odo, 9.6 frame cracked. I just got the call from the LBS that my new frame was in and the bike was ready to be picked up. What I wasn't expecting to hear was that there were no 9.6 frames available so I was upgraded to a 9.8 frame and fork. I included pics from the day I picked it up, a couple from the one ride I got in on it at Virginia Key here in Miami, as well as the crack so you can all double check your carbon frames in this location! I'll post pics of the new bike as soon as I can get it out on the dirt!
> 
> Pedal on!!


That is great you got the 9.8 Frame and that looks like a serious crack!!!! i have over 1000 miles on my 9.8 no issues to report..

have fun out on the dirt with another new bike..


----------



## PBL450 (Nov 3, 2015)

Robg68 said:


> I use Easton double lock on grips. They come in 2 different thickness of rubber. I got the thicker ones and they work and look great.


Awesome Farley! Love it!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

solarplex said:


> These dmr grips are the closest ive found if your blue is the same as the 6.


You may also want to try these: SDG Hansolo Lock-On Grip | Chain Reaction Cycles

Probably the best grip I've owned. Super tacky and wear really well. I found them to be slightly lighter than the blue on my Giant Anthem X4 but could be a perfect match for your F6. I just ordered a black pair to replace the stock grips on my F5.


----------



## tpdietz (Apr 28, 2014)

tyrone.minton said:


> So as I mentioned a right before Xmas, my 2 day old, less than 10 miles on the Odo, 9.6 frame cracked. I just got the call from the LBS that my new frame was in and the bike was ready to be picked up. What I wasn't expecting to hear was that there were no 9.6 frames available so I was upgraded to a 9.8 frame and fork. I included pics from the day I picked it up, a couple from the one ride I got in on it at Virginia Key here in Miami, as well as the crack so you can all double check your carbon frames in this location! I'll post pics of the new bike as soon as I can get it out on the dirt!
> 
> Pedal on!!


These are precisely the stories that scare me away from carbon mountain bikes. Although, in this situation, your outcome was about as good as it gets. That crack seems very serious - clearly something went horribly wrong during the manufacturing process. I'm glad you didn't get hurt when the frame failed!

Congratulations on the frame and fork upgrade! That is really awesome. I look forward to see pictures of your new ride.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

I am not a fan of the Barbegazi tires in snow. They are a dirt tire, imo. I tried them in about 5" of fresh powder and it was a joke. And I don't get the purpose of a 4.7" dirt tire. I'm going Bud/Lou for the winter and I may try those Rougarous this summer or go 29+. I love the versatility of this bike...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

hoboscratch said:


> I am not a fan of the Barbegazi tires in snow. They are a dirt tire, imo. And I don't get the purpose of a 4.7" dirt tire.


...but a 4" dirt tire makes perfect sense? Add .4" on either side and suddenly it has no business in the dirt? See where I'm going with this?
Even though it's winter, there's no snow on the ground and rocks and roots didn't go anywhere. I appreciate the cush.

Anyway I agree that the Barbegazi seems more like a dirt tire, and I'm finding no reason to go down to a 4" tire when riding fat in the dirt. When Summer comes I'll have the 29+ built up - that's a big enough difference where it makes sense. After some rides I have no desire to lower the bottom bracket on my 7.

Even in Summer I see myself sticking with the 4.7" Barbs much of the time. They really get the job done.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Yeah I suppose they are fine in the dirt. They got good enough traction. I did get to ride it in dirt before snow flew and with it set up tubeless it was much faster than my previous bike with 4" tires, heavier wheels, and tubes. 

I imagine I'll just go 29+ for most of the year and save the money instead of spending them on 4" tires. 

F'ing love the bike tho. Just gotta tweak things like these to my needs


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yep - great bike.  
I was toying with the idea of 4" Summer tires for a while too. A few rides cured me of that - bottom bracket clearance definitely being one factor.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> ...but a 4" dirt tire makes perfect sense? Add .4" on either side and suddenly it has no business in the dirt? See where I'm going with this?
> Even though it's winter, there's no snow on the ground and rocks and roots didn't go anywhere. I appreciate the cush.
> 
> Anyway I agree that the Barbegazi seems more like a dirt tire, and I'm finding no reason to go down to a 4" tire when riding fat in the dirt. When Summer comes I'll have the 29+ built up - that's a big enough difference where it makes sense. After some rides I have no desire to lower the bottom bracket on my 7.
> ...


Weight would be the main. Not saying hodags are light but... There are 4" fat bike tires thay weigh a bit more than all mountain tires


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Under most riding conditions you're not going to notice the weight difference unless you're going from a JJ to a particularly heavy 4.7-4.8" tire.
I know there are instances where you certainly can tell - don't get me wrong.

That said usung weight to choose a tire for a fatbike isn't always the smartest way to go about things (again unless we're talking about a particularly heavy tire)


----------



## Doug_ID (Feb 22, 2009)

hoboscratch said:


> I am not a fan of the Barbegazi tires in snow. They are a dirt tire, imo. I tried them in about 5" of fresh powder and it was a joke. And I don't get the purpose of a 4.7" dirt tire. I'm going Bud/Lou for the winter and I may try those Rougarous this summer or go 29+. I love the versatility of this bike


Pls let us know what you think of the bud/lou combo in comparison the the Barbegazi.

Due to constantly changing snow conditions it may be hard to get a true comparison though.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Doug_ID said:


> Pls let us know what you think of the bud/lou combo in comparison the the Barbegazi.
> .


See the Bud/Lou user thread.
Increase in weight, grip and rolling resistance. Increased chance of snow caking up on the tire if conditions are right/wrong. No mystery here.  
If I rode in snow more often I'd consider a set.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Yeah a guy here does a really good comparison of Bud/Lou vs Dillinger which is a great comparison if anyone is looking for a snow tire upgrade. http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/bud-lou-versus-dillinger-5-a-938358.html

Expecting more snow and some subzero temps this weekend! Should be a great time to test some new gear, including the Bontrager Old Man Winter boots

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tpdietz (Apr 28, 2014)

It finally came!!!! I'm so excited.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

tpdietz said:


> It finally came!!!! I'm so excited.
> 
> You pretty much suck!


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

tpdietz said:


> It finally came!!!! I'm so excited.
> 
> View attachment 1040957
> View attachment 1040958
> View attachment 1040959


Looks like you got it at wheels in motion. Ready for a poto ride any day!!!

Congrats


----------



## bwheelies (May 29, 2015)

Saw the Farley 5 yesterday. Would take it in a heartbeat over my Fatboy SE. Has all of the upgrades you would want like the axles, better brakes, shimano shifters(I prefer to Sram), comparable tires, Mulefut rims which are tubeless ready, etc..


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

bwheelies said:


> Saw the Farley 5 yesterday. Would take it in a heartbeat over my Fatboy SE. Has all of the upgrades you would want like the axles, better brakes, shimano shifters(I prefer to Sram), comparable tires, Mulefut rims which are tubeless ready, etc..


as a recent F5 owner I can tell you you can't go far wrong with it. As my first fat bike I thought...."what have I gone and bought?" "will I ever use it?" "It's bloody huge". Every time I go out on it though I have a massive grin on my face and people always want to talk about it while kids & adults stare at it in shock.

Was out recently in the middle of Storm Frank on some Donegal dunes & marsh and the Farley soaked it all up!


----------



## tpdietz (Apr 28, 2014)

litespeedaddict said:


> You pretty much suck!


:ciappa::smilewinkgrin:



tadraper said:


> Looks like you got it at wheels in motion. Ready for a poto ride any day!!!
> 
> Congrats


Thanks! Yes, you are correct, some of those pictures were snapped just outside wheels in motion. I would enjoy riding the potos with somebody. I don't really have any friends who ride, so I'm usually out solo. I definitely need more practice though. Right now, I'm positive I would hold you back! I'm a wimp when it comes to fast cornering. I just graduated from UM Engineering in December (I'm a late bloomer), and am hoping now I will have sufficient time to ride more, more, more. So yes, soon, we should ride!

Unfortunately, I still haven't ridden the bike yet on any trails. When I picked up the bike yesterday, the mechanic said they _just_ finished the tubeless set-up, and recommended I allow the sealant sit over night prior to riding. When I was checking out, the cashier said he would probably ride it anyway asap. I wasn't sure who to believe. Since this is my first experience with tubeless, I decided to wait.

This morning I rode for 10 minutes around my apartment complex, and little bit on some hilly grassy areas. Like others mtbr members have experienced, I felt some bouncing during increased cadence on asphalt. So I know I need to dial down to the correct pressure.

I was definitely impressed with how quick the bike feels though. I was also impressed by how much lighter the Farley 7 compared to my 2014 Fuel Ex-7. I don't have scales, but there is a significant weight difference according to my hands.

As somebody that doesn't have much experience riding many mountain bikes, I'm really excited to be able to have two (very) different bicycles to compare back to back. I'm hoping the juxtaposition will help teach a noob like me the pros and cons of the different features on both bikes. Specifically, tire size differences, suspension, and frame size (Farley 7 is 19.5, Ex-7 is 21.5).


----------



## tpdietz (Apr 28, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Was out recently in the middle of Storm Frank on some Donegal dunes & marsh and the Farley soaked it all up!
> View attachment 1041121


That's an awesome picture! Thanks for sharing.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Bud on the front. Pretty tight!









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

tpdietz said:


> That's an awesome picture! Thanks for sharing.


Cheers! When I got the F5 I just had to name it. Settled on 'Gator. Seemed right 😉


----------



## tyrone.minton (Feb 15, 2010)

Took it to work to show off today, then I pulled those heavy ass tubes. Shop only had Bontrager sealant, which is probably rebranded stans. I put 8 oz per tire since we have lots of pokey things here in Florida.

Guess I can't upload pics from my phone. Here they are on imgur.
Imgur: The most awesome images on the Internet


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

tyrone.minton said:


> Took it to work to show off today, then I pulled those heavy ass tubes. Shop only had Bontrager sealant, which is probably rebranded stans. I put 8 oz per tire since we have lots of pokey things here in Florida.
> 
> Guess I can't upload pics from my phone. Here they are on imgur.
> Imgur: The most awesome images on the Internet


Bike looks great!!

Did you build up the 9.8 from frame or do you have a second set of wheels?


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

hoboscratch said:


> Bud on the front. Pretty tight!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yikes! Is that tubeless? If so, I'd keep it at lower psi and keep and eye on it. Buds tend to stretch a bit when tubeless and ride up on the rim and you could end up with some contact.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

It is tubeless. I think the 5 is the only one with the alloy fork, so shouldn't be a problem for others. If it does contact, I guess I'll have to rethink my snow tire situation...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tyrone.minton (Feb 15, 2010)

tadraper said:


> Bike looks great!!
> 
> Did you build up the 9.8 from frame or do you have a second set of wheels?


Trek replaced my 9.6 frame with the 9.8, so I'll call this a 9.7 since it has all the lower components.

On that note, I went riding yesterday after going tubeless. Ran about 6psi. It was great!

I had one glitch with the GX1 deraileur. I snagged my foot on the cable and pulled the casing out of the stop at the back. This caused the cable to come off one of the cams. It would shift but only in the lower gears. If you get a slack shifter, flip the bike and make sure the cable is seated in both of the cams on GX1.

And now for some scenery from Virginia Key Mountain Bike Tails in sunny Miami.
































Gotta keep that salt off!








And now I realize why it was so easy to set up and get comfortable on. The geometry is almost identical to my Fisher HiFi.









Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Looks great!! i forgot you had that replaced the huge cracks i remember!!


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Got a little snow today!!


----------



## tyrone.minton (Feb 15, 2010)

Here's a vid mostly of my heavy breathing (new gopro Session mics work really well) around a couple of the trails here in Miami. Mostly to make you guys in the snow jealous of the heat, because I just want to ride in the snow.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> Got a little snow today!!
> 
> View attachment 1041574
> 
> View attachment 1041575


Missing out! It figures, I'm getting on a plane to Seattle today

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

tyrone.minton said:


> Here's a vid mostly of my heavy breathing (new gopro Session mics work really well) around a couple of the trails here in Miami. Mostly to make you guys in the snow jealous of the heat, because I just want to ride in the snow.


Great video those temps look very nice!!! will be months before that comes back to Michigan..


----------



## glockrocket17 (Aug 26, 2015)

Finally got a real snow ride on my new farley7. Absolutely love this bike.


----------



## SHowley2003 (Feb 21, 2008)

Has anyone demo an F5 and an F7? I plan on using my bike primarily in the snow (northeast USA), but it will see 12 months of use. I have no intentions of putting a suspension fork on it. All other things being equal is the carbon work worth the upgrade. I realize the F7 is a great bike and all the upgrades make it a phenomenal value. However I'm just looking for feedback on the differences in forks. Thanks in advance.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

SHowley2003 said:


> Has anyone demo an F5 and an F7? I plan on using my bike primarily in the snow (northeast USA), but it will see 12 months of use. I have no intentions of putting a suspension fork on it. All other things being equal is the carbon work worth the upgrade. I realize the F7 is a great bike and all the upgrades make it a phenomenal value. However I'm just looking for feedback on the differences in forks. Thanks in advance.


IMO, the fork future proofs you in case you wanted to move to the 27.5 Jackalopes by being 150mm vs 135mm. It should be 200+ grams lighter than the alloy, from what my LBS told me. You'll get the benefits of carbon, albeit with an alloy stem. But the 150mm is probably a good standard to be on out the gate.

I have the Farley 5. No regrets whatsoever, but will likely upgrade the fork at some point...


----------



## slowride454 (Jan 11, 2014)

Has anyone switched to a 24T chainring? I find myself using the 26-42T granny often on big climbs at the end of races. I don't think I'm going to miraculously get stronger or lighter before the Fat Bike Birkie, so I think I'm going to need more gear.


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

slowride454 said:


> Has anyone switched to a 24T chainring? I find myself using the 26-42T granny often on big climbs at the end of races. I don't think I'm going to miraculously get stronger or lighter before the Fat Bike Birkie, so I think I'm going to need more gear.


aren't the 7, 9 and 9.6 all 28T and the 9.8 30T?

I plan on pedaling fast downhill so I don't have to climb uphill at the birkie, worked fine last year


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yeah 28T - and I can't imagine spinning any more than that.
Already it's low enough to get up a hill that were it any steeper, the front wheel would never stay on the ground. I stand up an hammer something taller whenever possible.
Any lower though than that stock gear and I'd just topple over.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

TitanofChaos said:


> aren't the 7, 9 and 9.6 all 28T and the 9.8 30T?
> 
> I plan on pedaling fast downhill so I don't have to climb uphill at the birkie, worked fine last year


9.8 30T YES that is what came on mine.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

I was worried about the posts stating that hydraulic brakes are a problem in the cold. Cool kids go with mechanical disc brakes because of it. 

I've ridden in -5F and lower the last four days and the brakes performed really well. No noticeable change in performance. I'm not going 30 mph on a DH course or anything so take that into account. 

The shifting......much more sluggish but nothing that was bothersome.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I was thinking of going SS on the fatty after training SS for a while on the ol 26" - but with these new derailleurs/no chain slap I'm over it.
I'd rather have a nice selection of SS gears with me that I can swap out with a push of a button. The terrain around here is just too variable to make SS any fun - for me anyway. I hate spinning on gradual descents. Then I hit a 43 degree wall and the SS I would need for that would make the entire rest of the ride no fun.
I was dead set on it too - only took a few rides to break of that desire.

I still ride it like an SS for the most part (stand and hammer a taller gear rather than sitting and spinning a lower one) but I have the freedom to switch when I need to.

If I lived somewhere where the trails were more mellow, pure SS would be more practical.


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

fellow Farley owners, if i would slam my rear wheel all the way forward, do i have to take out a couple of chainlinks?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mkdiehl (Dec 30, 2014)

I didn't......


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

I did ob mine. that could be the reason i am missing two teeth on the 42 cog.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

tagabalay said:


> fellow Farley owners, if i would slam my rear wheel all the way forward, do i have to take out a couple of chainlinks?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I didn't the only thing i did was adjust the b screw and all was well.


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

Thank you. I ordered an XO1 cassettee and putting the two links back. i will charge it to experience


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TheFatrTheBetr (Jan 1, 2016)

I weigh 170 lbs and run my Farley 5 stock with tubes (for now) and the stock 4.7 barbegazis at 5.5 psi in the front and 6 psi in the back on hardpack dirt trails. Those psis seem to be the sweet spot for me. Going lower starts to increase the auto steer and higher causes the bike to bounce around a bit too much over rocks and roots. 

I tried the bike out last night on the trail in the first real snow conditions. The snow was packed from other riders. The tires ran well 5 and 5.5. I'm thinking I might need to go lower for looser conditions. 

Has anyone run the 4.7 barbegazis tubeless is snow conditions that can provide feedback on psis?


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

I rode tubeless at 3ish psi in 4ish" of fresh snow. Too much for the Barbs. Every other condition it has been good for me.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## slowride454 (Jan 11, 2014)

tagabalay said:


> fellow Farley owners, if i would slam my rear wheel all the way forward, do i have to take out a couple of chainlinks?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I removed 4 links when I slammed mine and adjusted the B screw a little


----------



## Jmf003 (Nov 23, 2011)

tpdietz said:


> ...Yes, you are correct, some of those pictures were snapped just outside wheels in motion. I would enjoy riding the potos with somebody. I don't really have any friends who ride, so I'm usually out solo. I definitely need more practice though....


You should consider getting on the Wheels in Motion ride list. There are usually two group fat bike rides a week during the winter: one Wednesday evening on the Ann Arbor Local Loop (avoiding the parks that are closed due to the deer cull) and the other on weekends at various outlying trails. This weekend's ride is at 12:30 PM on Saturday in the "Badlands" section of Island Lake, leaving from the Spring Mill Pond parking lot.


----------



## TheFatrTheBetr (Jan 1, 2016)

Having a 2016 Farley 5 or 7 or past year's models, what are some good carbon fork options? Does anyone know if there is a hub conversion kit for the front hub from the qr to 150 TA? Thank you for the help.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

The Farley 7 already has a carbon fork. The new Trek Harau fork sells for $399. The best bet would be to lace up a new 150 TA hub and be done with it.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yep


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

My wife joined the Farley club today taking home a F7. We were close to buying her an Hellga, but for what it would have cost to upgrade the various parts it was cheaper to just get the well equipped Farley. She's really looking forward to riding it, hopefully this subzero temp blast doesn't last long...


----------



## lwkwafi (Jan 29, 2006)

I really dig the purple Trek has for this and the Remedy. 
My fiance is digging her Hellga comp. Only upgrades were carbon post and bars, and setting the tires up tubeless. (admittedly F7 is cheaper than the hellga expert with a similar setup, save for xt brakes which are way nicer than avids). 
And her medium (real size is small) has two bottle cages.


----------



## mic360 (May 4, 2015)

Anyone know of any frame bags that fit the Farley and have pics? Don't think I seen any in the thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

The kid took my Farley for a joy ride. Lol
View attachment 1043274


----------



## vice grips (Dec 21, 2012)

I have gone back and forth between the 7 and 9. I decided to go with the 7 because I wanted the fatter tires/wheels. I plan on upgrading the fork when I sell my fat boy. So I call the shop to order a Farley 7. The owner said they were sold out. I was bummed because there was a few bikes two weeks ago but I dragged my feet. After he told me they were sold out, he waited a few seconds than said he just got a 5 and 7. But he wasn't sure what size they were. He took his time walking over to the bikes(he's my friend and I help out when they are short handed) he told me what the 5 was first knowing that I didn't want that bike. Anyways the 7 was my size, and two hours later it was sitting in my basement. Very excited to get it out there.








I still have to put my dropper, stem, handle bars on


----------



## midschool22 (Apr 13, 2012)

^ Rad bike. Love my Farley 7 too.


----------



## midschool22 (Apr 13, 2012)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Might give these a go as my next tyre. How much and where from pls? Anyone try running the On-one tyres on their bikes? Any opinions on them?
> On-One Floater Fat Tyre | On - One
> 
> On-One Floater 120TPI Folding Tyre | On - One


I work for a Trek dealer and got the Rougarou tires from Trek directly. Cost?...top secret.


----------



## socalrcer (Dec 6, 2013)

midschool22 said:


> I work for a Trek dealer and got the Rougarou tires from Trek directly. Cost?...top secret.


Just picked up a Farley 9 and thinking of getting some 26" back up wheels. Curious how much the bottom bracket height would be lowered with 26" 3.8's, which might cause pedal strikes. I'd like to be able to run 4.7's for sand/snow and 3.8's on 26's as an option. 27.5's have been awesome but it's scary not having tires readily available.

This is my first fat bike and it is a blast. Been trail riding in SoCal with it. I'll get some picks up soon.


----------



## Chikusho (Aug 7, 2007)

I apologize beforehand. I have been a member since 2009 but haven`t done any serious riding other than commuting to work every day. I have had my eye on a fat bike for some time now and I want to purchase a Farley. By the way I live in Tokyo. I went down to the Trek dealer and he had a 5 and 9, but neither were in my size. I was ready to purchase one on the spot. I need a 21.5. I contacted Trek Japan and they don`t carry that size. I guess they think that everyone over here is short, but there are a lot of Japanese people that are 6' and taller. 

Anyway, I need to find a way to purchase a frame used/new. Does anybody have any suggestions?


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Technically NOT a Farley post but as an F5 owner I figure I can put this up. Did some Fat Biking in the snow in France for the first time last week and it was incredible fun. Brilliant on a just-pisted skirun although hard to tell in my video. We rode Scott Big Jons and they seemed like pretty good bike/spec. Maybe a bit lighter than my F5 but not as stiff.
Promo video: 



My (pretty dark) GoPro footage:


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

midschool22 said:


> I work for a Trek dealer and got the Rougarou tires from Trek directly. Cost?...top secret.


cheers. Will ask my Trek dealer what he can get them for.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

We got snow!










This was my first time riding in snow, and I had a blast on the bike, but my word, it was hard work. On the level (ish) ground in the photo, it wasn't too bad, but going up hill in deep, fresh snow was "interesting" - I was well impressed with the traction from the Barbegazis once I dropped the pressure, then dropped it again... and again..  I could ride up on the soft snow, but getting going again up hill eventually proved impossible. Coming back down was a hoot - I couldn't believe what the bike would float over.

I need to slide the rear wheel to the back of dropout before I go again (it's all the way forwards at the moment) as it was almost impossible to keep the front down going up hill (there's massively more traction / resistance than non-snow conditions).

I measured the tyre pressure when I got home, and both tyres were at about 1 PSI. No sign of burping or slipping (tubeless) and I never bottomed it out.

I'd got some Floaters to try, but the big Barbegazis will be staying on now until the snow has gone.

Good toy!


----------



## PBL450 (Nov 3, 2015)

It wasn't much, but it the Barbagazis in their first bit of snow.


----------



## Dynomite (Oct 17, 2007)

I'm in the fence between the 5 and the 7. I have the money for the 7 but despise the ugly-ass purple. Think Trek would sell more of them if it was flat black, or almost any other color but purple. I guess I can peel off the stickers and rattle can it. Stickers come off easy?


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Consider function over fashion, the 7 is a nice build.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Dynomite said:


> I'm in the fence between the 5 and the 7. I have the money for the 7 but despise the ugly-ass purple. Think Trek would sell more of them if it was flat black, or almost any other color but purple. I guess I can peel off the stickers and rattle can it. Stickers come off easy?


The purple grew on me - it's a very nice bike in person. Certainly not a reason to go with the 5 - which does have a great color scheme. Get over it.


----------



## PBL450 (Nov 3, 2015)

Dynomite said:


> I'm in the fence between the 5 and the 7. I have the money for the 7 but despise the ugly-ass purple. Think Trek would sell more of them if it was flat black, or almost any other color but purple. I guess I can peel off the stickers and rattle can it. Stickers come off easy?


Seriously? I love the purple! If I had the scratch I'd have done that just for the color!!


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

I am wondering why only the carbon frameset is offered and not an aluminum? does anyone have any insight?


----------



## PBL450 (Nov 3, 2015)

Fuzzwardo said:


> I am wondering why only the carbon frameset is offered and not an aluminum? does anyone have any insight?


I am likely misunderstanding your post, but 5 is al with al fork and 7 is al with carbon fork.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

PBL450 said:


> Seriously? I love the purple! If I had the scratch I'd have done that just for the color!!


You can use the Trek card 12 mo same as cash if you don't have the cheddar!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Fuzzwardo said:


> I am wondering why only the carbon frameset is offered and not an aluminum? does anyone have any insight?


It's not on thier web page but you can just order the 5 alloy frame, thats what I did. I think it's listed at $1099. I paid $1000 for mine.


----------



## fatboy43 (May 4, 2008)

Fuzzwardo said:


> I am wondering why only the carbon frameset is offered and not an aluminum? does anyone have any insight?


I ordered the 5 frameset from my lbs. My understanding is the carbon or the 5 is available.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Dynomite said:


> I'm in the fence between the 5 and the 7. I have the money for the 7 but despise the ugly-ass purple. Think Trek would sell more of them if it was flat black, or almost any other color but purple. I guess I can peel off the stickers and rattle can it. Stickers come off easy?


My wife went with the 7 due partially to the purple color. Black would have been a non starter, as she ruled out the Beargrease alloy due to color.

I am surprised that Trek doesn't have a few color options though, especially for the higher volume sales base models.


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

PBL450 said:


> I am likely misunderstanding your post, but 5 is al with al fork and 7 is al with carbon fork.


I am talking about just the bare frame. I only see the carbon frame listed .


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

FT251 said:


> It's not on thier web page but you can just order the 5 alloy frame, thats what I did. I think it's listed at $1099. I paid $1000 for mine.


Cool thanks. I thought it was kind of silly not to offer one.

Cool thanks.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

After contacting Curt industries about an attachment for my Fat Bike, they told me I would have to buy a new one.....
I had the local welding shop make my bike rack "Fat Friendly"


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Fuzzwardo said:


> I am wondering why only the carbon frameset is offered and not an aluminum? does anyone have any insight?


Because it costs money to produce something and just sit on it? There's already an aluminum build with both tire sizes? Someone at Trek figured that the person who's going the suicidaly expensive route of a custom build will likely want carbon to boot? 
That's my best guess.

Edit - but now I see the 5 is available, so best guess out the window!


----------



## midschool22 (Apr 13, 2012)

Changed out the pedals on the Farley 7. Now running Raceface Chester composites. Pretty cool.


----------



## vice grips (Dec 21, 2012)

I've had a few rides now on my F7 and I couldn't be happier! Im coming from a fat boy and even though the Farley is a little bit bigger that the FB it feels much more nimble and tight. Im very impressed with how tight the bike feels, and i belive it inspires confidence on the bike when your riding in soft snow on steeper terrain. Im riding the same trails that i ride on my 6" trail bike. I really wanted to put a bluto on but im thinking I'll wait it out. We have pretty soft dry snow but the bike fells very forgiving. I've only gotten to ride in the longer dropout setting. It climbs great as is, hope it will handle the soft snow in the shorter setting I love me some short CS
















So um any one want a lightly used large fat boy? Lol


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I just slammed the stays forward on my 7 - really made a difference.
Manuals/wheelies even easier now, and a bit more nimble.
I have a 60mm stem and carbon bar coming.

XT brakes are the only other change I made - that was money well spent.
No plans for a suspension fork any time soon - handles roots and rocks with aplomb as is.


----------



## vice grips (Dec 21, 2012)

I'm really looking forward to trying the short stays. I throw on some 780mm bars and a 50mm stem. I'm thinking of trying my 800mm boobars from my HD bike , it feels like I could go wider. I also had a gravity dropper but I'm not crazy how the cable looks coming into the post with the low top tube. I'm a big fan of xt brakes to but so far I'm satisfied with the avids. I wish there was bigger rotors. I've cooked a lot of brakes flying down 1500ft in a few mins on a snowmobile trail.


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

Took a little test ride at my LBS on a 9.6... I really didn't need to do this!:crazy:


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Tunalic said:


> Took a little test ride at my LBS on a 9.6... I really didn't need to do this!:crazy:


Buy it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

hoboscratch said:


> Buy it.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Good thing it's got them 27.5s on it or I'd probably put it on my trek card.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

had a nice ride this morning!!


----------



## midschool22 (Apr 13, 2012)

Snowmageddon?...Farley don't care.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Damn those pedals are Fuhhh...uugly.
How do you like the Rougarou in the snow?

I thought briefly about a set of those on my 7 for summer before settling on 29+


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Look closely, what do you see? 2017 spy photo.


----------



## TuTone T (Dec 12, 2012)

Excessive cabling?


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Travis Brown's Twitter. No words about the bike. The extra cables are data sensors for a log box probably in the bag.


----------



## mr.finn (May 19, 2010)

After talking to the LBS today about some options, the Farley 9.6 may be the bike I am after. Will sleep on it tonight and likely pull the trigger tomorrow. Can't wait!!


----------



## G-Choro (Jul 30, 2010)

FT251 said:


> View attachment 1045221
> 
> 
> Look closely, what do you see? 2017 spy photo.


Barbegazi in 27.5?!

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## vice grips (Dec 21, 2012)

I've had 5 rides on the Farley this week, my legs are cooked!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

mr.finn said:


> After talking to the LBS today about some options, the Farley 9.6 may be the bike I am after. Will sleep on it tonight and likely pull the trigger tomorrow. Can't wait!!


Just make sure they're not pushing it because it's the bike they have on the floor. Bike shops like to do that. Get the bike you want.


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

rain100 said:


> If you're looking into the Farley 5, and wanting a 1x drivetrain, I would suggest taking another look at the 7. The Farley 7 and above all have a much narrower 1x specific crank setup that decreases q factor by 20mm. This is huge!
> 
> The other upgrades that the 7 has over the 5 (carbon fork, 11 speed rear sram setup, DB3 brakes) are nice, but the fact that it has a narrower q factor is reason enough to look past the 5.
> 
> That being said, you could swap out the stock 5 crank for a race face Aeffect crankset to get the same q factor of the 7.


I sent you a PM but maybe this can be answered so everyone can see it. if the current 2x crankset on the Farley 5 was replaced with a Raceface Aeffect to go 1x and to lower the Q factor would the bottom bracket have to be changed as well? Thanks


----------



## yamaha46 (Jul 17, 2009)

What is the actual Q factor on the 5?
and the Q factor on the 7/9?

I know the Q factor on the 5 is wider than needed. But everywhere I look they say about keeping the narrower Q factor for the new farleys (7/9) with 190 rear hub, but can't find the actual figure.


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

yamaha46 said:


> What is the actual Q factor on the 5?
> and the Q factor on the 7/9?
> 
> I know the Q factor on the 5 is wider than needed. But everywhere I look they say about keeping the narrower Q factor for the new farleys (7/9) with 190 rear hub, but can't find the actual figure.


not sure what the actual numbers are but the 1x farleys use the shorter spindle cranks for 170 bikes with the chainring flipped to push the chainline to the outside

This isn't a perfect example as it's from the GXP crank but you'll get the idea, the red line shows roughly where the chainring ends up for the farleys when flipped


----------



## yamaha46 (Jul 17, 2009)

Thanks.

Ok I found the race face specs:
http://www.raceface.com/comp/pdf/FATBIKE-CRANK-CLEARANCES.pdf

Looks like it's 202mm Q factor the 5 is probable around the 222mm mark.

In pictures I notice my feet are normally towards the outer edge of the pedals so i'd probably by good on the 202 Q factor. The 222 I might start to notice though.


----------



## mr.finn (May 19, 2010)

Did not get pushed into it. Talked to the store owner, went over some things, budget, components,ect. The 9.6 is coming. It wasn't in the shop so I did not get pressured, it had to be ordered. Can't wait to try it out!! Now that the ground is melting in Mass.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Congrats!
You'll get hammered again with snow - don't worry.
I wish we had some - another non-winter for us.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

yamaha46 said:


> What is the actual Q factor on the 5?


226mm measured with stock RF Ride cranks (outside face of cranks at pedal - inside face of cranks is 200mm)

This gives about 15mm clearance between the cranks and the chainstays at the closest point each side. There is 20mm clearance at the pedal position)

They are "190mm" spindle cranks which have a ~~10mm spacer each side of the BB.

Chainline (centre of double ring) is 76mm.

HTH!


----------



## yamaha46 (Jul 17, 2009)

Thanks Misterg.
Thats the only thing that bothers me with the 5 is the wider q factor cranks.
Don't think the 7 is available in the UK either, maybe you can get it on special order.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

yamaha46 said:


> ... the only thing that bothers me with the 5 is the wider q factor cranks.


I know it's a very personal thing, but I don't even notice it.

I just looked up the Q factor of the 3x10 Shimano XT cranks on my mountain bike - 168mm! I can switch between this and my F5 without noticing any difference.

(I'm absolutely obsessive about crank length, though - I can tell the difference between 170 and 175mm straight away, and run 165mm on both of my bikes - for the record, I'm about 5'6" and quite broadly built.)

You would be welcome to try my F5 if you are in N Wales.


----------



## yamaha46 (Jul 17, 2009)

Thanks for the offer, I am in N wales as it happens.
How do you find the bike for the trails around here?
I mainly ride at Coed Y Brenin.
Are you using the original Berbagazi tyres and rigid fork?
Have you tried 3.8 tyres or are you happy with the Berbagazi?

I may be getting a second hand fatboy frame to build up. Have to try out the full fat for myself. If I was buying new though i'd probably go for the Farley.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

yamaha46 said:


> Thanks for the offer, I am in N wales as it happens.
> How do you find the bike for the trails around here?
> I mainly ride at Coed Y Brenin.
> Are you using the original Berbagazi tyres and rigid fork?
> Have you tried 3.8 tyres or are you happy with the Berbagazi?


Hah!

I'm a bit further North - Denbighshire.

I think it's great for the natural stuff. I've ridden C-Y-B, but not on the Farley (yet). It's been all over the Clwydian hills and around Llandegla. It would be fantastic on something like Pink Heifer.

Still using the stock fork/tyres at the moment, BUT I have just got a set of Bluto forks to fit. Even through fat tyres you can tell it's a rigid bike which becomes punishing on fast, bumpy descents (Going from memory, I think something like the middle bit of Snap/Crackle/Pop might give me a good shaking!). Now this isn't really its territory and I agonised about whether I would be trying to turn the bike into some thing it's not, because the rest of the time the bike is great. Then, after a few beers, I saw a good deal on a set of RCT3 Blutos... they arrived this week  - I'll let you know how I get on!

I picked up a set of OO Floaters when they were <£20 each (just because...) and intended to see how they compared to the Barbegazis in the mud, but then we had snow, so the fattest tyres stayed on. The Barbegazi's have been fine, to be honest, but I think they need to be run very soft. The only time I feel they've struggled has been in REALLY slippery clay/mud where they just slide everywhere, but I think anything other than a really skinny tyre would have been the same - I couldn't even stand up on it. They're pretty quick on trail centre stuff.

I've just realised - they have a Trek demo fleet at Beics Brenin in the centre at Coed Y Brenin, so you may be able to wangle a test ride. If not, they have Farley 5s for hire: £25 for a couple of hours on familiar trails?

Bike Hire | Beics Brenin, Coed Y Brenin

Good luck with the build if you go that way - there seem to be a lot of compatibility issues to consider with fat bikes


----------



## indyfab25 (Feb 10, 2004)

mr.finn said:


> Did not get pushed into it. Talked to the store owner, went over some things, budget, components,ect. The 9.6 is coming. It wasn't in the shop so I did not get pressured, it had to be ordered. Can't wait to try it out!! Now that the ground is melting in Mass.


4.5 Barbegazi tires available soon too!

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk


----------



## indyfab25 (Feb 10, 2004)

FT251 said:


> View attachment 1045221
> 
> 
> Look closely, what do you see? 2017 spy photo.


27.5x4.5" tires.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

snow forecast for Northern Ireland tomorrow! Any excuse to bust out my Farley...even though it will just look like a light dusting of icing sugar and will turn to slush quickly.

Did try riding the Scott Big Jon bike in DEEP snow a couple weeks ago. Damn! It was hard work. A blast on groomed ski runs but definitely NOT easy on deep stuff.


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

So I have looked through the entire 48 pages over the last couple days. I am getting a Farley 5. I will make one change which is to swap to a 1x10 and get the Raceface Aeffect crankset for the F5 using the same one that is on the F7. What I am unclear about is the crankset spindle length. What size is on the F7? My goal is to lower m Q factor.


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

bluto on 9.6 would you go with 100 or 120mm travel ?


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Ranger Pride said:


> So I have looked through the entire 48 pages over the last couple days. I am getting a Farley 5. I will make one change which is to swap to a 1x10 and get the Raceface Aeffect crankset for the F5 using the same one that is on the F7. What I am unclear about is the crankset spindle length. What size is on the F7? My goal is to lower m Q factor.


I have a brand new take off of the 9.6 RF Aeffect crankset with the narrow Q factor. I don't know if this would fit on the 5, but can provide any info you may need on the 9.6 cranks, and are available for sale with the stock 28 tooth NW chainring and BB if you are interested.


----------



## mr.finn (May 19, 2010)

indyfab25 said:


> 4.5 Barbegazi tires available soon too!
> 
> Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk


Really? That's great news. Hopefully some of the other manufacturers will jump on board soon also.


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

JackP42 said:


> I have a brand new take off of the 9.6 RF Aeffect crankset with the narrow Q factor. I don't know if this would fit on the 5, but can provide any info you may need on the 9.6 cranks, and are available for sale with the stock 28 tooth NW chainring and BB if you are interested.


Thanks for the offer. PM your price and what the spindle measurement is.


----------



## dEOS (May 25, 2009)

aquamogal said:


> bluto on 9.6 would you go with 100 or 120mm travel ?


Farley 9 has 100mm travel. Go for that to keep the geometry.


----------



## indyfab25 (Feb 10, 2004)

bdundee said:


> I rode with a guy tonight on the hodag 27.5++ and here is my take, (snow only) if you want to go fast in perfect groomed or stomped conditions these seem like good tires. If you want to ride in anything but perfect conditions these pizza cutters aren't for you. This really has nothing to do with the wheel size but with the crap size tires they put on em. Just not a good tire for everyday riding in adverse winter conditions, ymmv of coarse.





mr.finn said:


> Really? That's great news. Hopefully some of the other manufacturers will jump on board soon also.


Yes, really.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk


----------



## TheFatrTheBetr (Jan 1, 2016)

fat_biike_boy said:


> These would be made in the USA from 6061 Aluminum. Modified the design from the forum on pg 9 (Farley 6/8) with an internal o-ring gasket.
> 
> What is the preference on the finish?
> (option 1) Aluminum with a protective clear coat or
> ...


I would definitely be in for a pair of these adapters. Let me know. Thank you.


----------



## mr.finn (May 19, 2010)

One way to make sure it won't snow this winter is to buy a fat bike. Picking up the 9.6 today or tomorrow. What little snow we had in the north east is now gone, rain coming today.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

mr.finn said:


> One way to make sure it won't snow this winter is to buy a fat bike. Picking up the 9.6 today or tomorrow. What little snow we had in the north east is now gone, rain coming today.


I could not have said it better myself.
It's 56 degrees in MI.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Same here. Recently acquired a 9.6 and now it is 14C and raining. Hopefully we will get some kind of winter in the remain months.


----------



## JakeTurbo (Dec 28, 2015)

Hey guys, sorry if this is a dumb question. 

What is the crank spindle length required on the trek farley? Also is there a 30mm bb that will fit it? 

Got some hope cranks i wouldn't mind converting and putting on a farley.


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

JakeTurbo said:


> Hey guys, sorry if this is a dumb question.
> 
> What is the crank spindle length required on the trek farley? Also is there a 30mm bb that will fit it?
> 
> Got some hope cranks i wouldn't mind converting and putting on a farley.


Don't know if you are looking to fit these on an aluminum or carbon frame Farley. I only know about the carbon and don't know if they are the same.
Anyway. the 9.6 and 9.8 use cranks intended for 170 width rear hub. The BB shell is 41mm ID x 121.5mm wide. I know a Farley 5 has cranks intended for 190/197 rear hub and therefore have a 20mm wider Q-factor.
RaceFace makes a BB for this application with a 30mm spindle as their Next SL cranks as fitted to the 9.8 have a 30mm spindle. The RF BB part number is BB4112430B15. This BB can be used in and width shell that is 41mm ID, only the dust shield spacer is width specific and it can be omitted as is done in some applications like the stock cranks on the 9.6. 
Hope this helps.


----------



## JakeTurbo (Dec 28, 2015)

Thanks


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

JakeTurbo said:


> What is the crank spindle length required on the trek farley? ...Got some hope cranks...


Here you go:

http://www.hopetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2015-AM-Crankset-Frame-fit-spec-and-Chainline.pdf

If it's the 2016 F5, then you're looking for a ~76mm chainline (per my post above), so it looks like the 192mm spindle (unless you can do something fancy with the chainring).

No idea about the BB {you would need}, sorry.

(BB on the F5 is as described above by JackP42)


----------



## carbuncle (Dec 9, 2005)

mr.finn said:


> One way to make sure it won't snow this winter is to buy a fat bike. Picking up the 9.6 today or tomorrow. What little snow we had in the north east is now gone, rain coming today.


Exactly, I was looking at a Farley 5 yesterday (very nice) but I was struck by the "maybe next year" feeling. At this point, it's getting to be trail time.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

carbuncle said:


> Exactly, I was looking at a Farley 5 yesterday (very nice) but I was struck by the "maybe next year" feeling. At this point, it's getting to be trail time.


Bah...you're missing out. My Farley 7 is for the trails - it will see snow rarely.


----------



## rain100 (Sep 12, 2014)

JakeTurbo said:


> Hey guys, sorry if this is a dumb question.
> 
> What is the crank spindle length required on the trek farley? Also is there a 30mm bb that will fit it?
> 
> Got some hope cranks i wouldn't mind converting and putting on a farley.


If you're looking for a 30mm crankset, you can't go wrong with either the raceface turbine or next sl. Raceface's bottom bracket works well too. The spindle length that comes stock on the farley 9 and 9.8 is Raceface's 169mm spindle.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

rain100 said:


> ...The spindle length that comes stock on the farley 9 and 9.8 is Raceface's 169mm spindle.


Just as a 'heads-up' to JakeTurbo, this spindle length only works because the chainring is 'flipped' to get the chainline - I don't know if you can do this with the Hope cranks.


----------



## Estuche (Apr 18, 2010)

*Sram XX1 cranks on Farley?*



Fat Dan said:


> Sure, here you go:
> CS width at widest point (ie. near your heels) is 164 mm
> CS outer width at rear hub (excluding axle QR) is 233 mm
> Q factor (centre of frame to outermost crank face at pedals) is 114mm (ie 228mm total bilaterally).
> ...


Based on these frame measurements it seems likely that the Farley could fit an Sram XX1 168mm (internal) qfactor crankset, which would provide the lowest qfactor possible at 194mm external (assuming crank arms´thickness at 13mm). Can anyone confirm this? I know that the Farley 8 comes with an Sram crankset, so arguably the pf121 bb is compatible with other Sram cranks, unless the Farley 8 is not press-fit? Anyone knows anything about this possibility??


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> Bah...you're missing out. My Farley 7 is for the trails - it will see snow rarely.


same here. We rarely get snow. I got an F5 as it seemed to be the best bang for buck into the world of Fat Bikes. Others around the same price had slightly lower component spec or not as forward thinking design. I've had my F5 on a mixture of trail centres, natural, beaches and all sorts. It's a blast to ride in all conditions. Climbing on it is better than some of the so-called "enduro" bikes I've tested recently...which are too slack and have to much suspension IMHO. I can also tell you a rigid Farley will eat up rock gardens on a wet or slippy day that would have other MTBs slipping all over the place. PLUS small kids look at you in awe, women and small animals shrink in terror and other riders look at you in sheer bemusement. Why WOULDN'T you want one? Also...you don't need a bell. People hear you long before they see you. Just get one now. YOU need THIS ! ;-)


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> same here. We rarely get snow. I got an F5 as it seemed to be the best bang for buck into the world of Fat Bikes. Others around the same price had slightly lower component spec or not as forward thinking design. I've had my F5 on a mixture of trail centres, natural, beaches and all sorts. It's a blast to ride in all conditions. Climbing on it is better than some of the so-called "enduro" bikes I've tested recently...which are too slack and have to much suspension IMHO. I can also tell you a rigid Farley will eat up rock gardens on a wet or slippy day that would have other MTBs slipping all over the place. PLUS small kids look at you in awe, women and small animals shrink in terror and other riders look at you in sheer bemusement. Why WOULDN'T you want one*? Also...you don't need a bell. People hear you long before they see you. *Just get one now. YOU need THIS ! ;-)


I mounted a sweet clownish ype horn with the big bulb for honking on my bike. But I don't get to use it anymore because the tire sound is amplified by my studs. People here me coming from a long way off.......


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Estuche said:


> > Quote Originally Posted by Fat Dan
> >
> > CS width at widest point (ie. near your heels) is 164 mm
> > CS outer width at rear hub (excluding axle QR) is 233 mm
> ...


The crankset may fit (or it may not*), but can you get the required chainline with them? Which ones were you thinking of?

*The minimum chainstay clearance with the RF Ride 190mm cranks is not at the end of the cranks - the narrowest clearance is 5mm less than the clearance at the end of the cranks due to the way the cranks curve inwards - this obviously depends on the design of the cranks, but you may well find the crank arms fouling here, even if you can work out how to get the chainline.


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

yamaha46 said:


> Thanks Misterg.
> Thats the only thing that bothers me with the 5 is the wider q factor cranks.
> Don't think the 7 is available in the UK either, maybe you can get it on special order.


No 7 as far as I can see in the UK unfortunately.

John


----------



## [email protected] (Jan 6, 2016)

JohnMcL7 said:


> No 7 as far as I can see in the UK unfortunately.
> 
> John


Sadly for us overhere in Europe, the 7 is not availible. My LBS has tried to order one for me in the USA, but Trek would not deliver it in Europe. But it's a great package looking at the spec, got everything I wanted. 
Orderd a 5 instead and converted it to 1x and maybe in the near future I'll look for a (Chiner) 135mm carbon fork. But for sofar very happy with my 5.


----------



## Estuche (Apr 18, 2010)

Misterg said:


> The crankset may fit (or it may not*), but can you get the required chainline with them? Which ones were you thinking of?
> 
> *The minimum chainstay clearance with the RF Ride 190mm cranks is not at the end of the cranks - the narrowest clearance is 5mm less than the clearance at the end of the cranks due to the way the cranks curve inwards - this obviously depends on the design of the cranks, but you may well find the crank arms fouling here, even if you can work out how to get the chainline.


I was thinking about the Sram xx1 fat crankset but the narrower one made for 170mm hubs:
Bikeman SRAM XX1 Fat Bike Crankset GXP100 175mm Chainring & Bottom Bracket Not Included

I read on this same thread that, for example, the Trek 9.8 uses the Race Face 170mm version of the Next SL cranks. I figured that I could do the same with the XX1 based on the chaintays width. Regarding the chainline it seems that using a Wolftooth on the XX1 would do the trick:
http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0230/9291/files/WTC_Fat_Bike_Hub_Spacing_and_Drivetrain_Optimization_v2.pdf?1305

See page 7.

Another thing I am not sure of is what bottom bracket to use with the Sram since the Farley is press-fit (though, again, Trek did use Sram on a prior version).

It would be nice to have that ~195mm qfactor on a Farley, that would even beat the Caad fat's 198mm one that Cannondale seems to hype so much


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Estuche said:


> I was thinking about the Sram xx1 fat crankset but the narrower one made for 170mm hubs:
> Bikeman SRAM XX1 Fat Bike Crankset GXP100 175mm Chainring & Bottom Bracket Not Included
> 
> I read on this same thread that, for example, the Trek 9.8 uses the Race Face 170mm version of the Next SL cranks. I figured that I could do the same with the XX1 based on the chaintays width. Regarding the chainline it seems that using a Wolftooth on the XX1 would do the trick:
> ...


Note that to get the correct chainline with the 170 RF cranks, the chainring is installed backwards with the dish out in stead of the normal dish in. This significantly shifts the chainline. I am not sure how this would work with other cranks like SRAM. Something you should look into.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Estuche said:


> I was thinking about the Sram xx1 fat crankset but the narrower one made for 170mm hubs:
> Bikeman SRAM XX1 Fat Bike Crankset GXP100 175mm Chainring & Bottom Bracket Not Included
> 
> I read on this same thread that, for example, the Trek 9.8 uses the Race Face 170mm version of the Next SL cranks. I figured that I could do the same with the XX1 based on the chaintays width. Regarding the chainline it seems that using a Wolftooth on the XX1 would do the trick:
> ...


I'm not sure. It seems to work on paper, but...

I think Wolftooth are saying that the DM BB30 ring gives a chainline of 70mm (they write 170 and 172mm, but I'm pretty sure they mean 70 and 72mm as they quote on the page before). The inner ring of my F5 runs at 72mm, the outer at 80mm chainline. The tips of the teeth on the 34T outer ring are barely 5mm clear of the chainstay axially. (i.e. if you moved it to a 75mm chainline, the teeth would hit the chainstay where it flares out.) I doubt that you would be able to get anything bigger than a 28T ring at a 70mm chainline - a 30T would be very tight, even if it were possible.

The cranks you linked to are GXP, but I assume BB30 ones are available.

It's far from a "sure thing" - you would need to do some very careful measuring.

195 / 198 / 200 - who cares? That's only a difference of one or two mm each side!


----------



## KantoBoy (Oct 25, 2015)

[email protected] said:


> Sadly for us overhere in Europe, the 7 is not availible. My LBS has tried to order one for me in the USA, but Trek would not deliver it in Europe. But it's a great package looking at the spec, got everything I wanted.
> Orderd a 5 instead and converted it to 1x and maybe in the near future I'll look for a (Chiner) 135mm carbon fork. But for sofar very happy with my 5.


This is unfortunate.

I'm a 7 owner myself and I see tons of 7s everywhere on social media. I'm curious to see how many of the 5s and the 7s were sold so far. Anyone from Trek wanna chime in?


----------



## Wildbird99 (Dec 7, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> same here. We rarely get snow. I got an F5 as it seemed to be the best bang for buck into the world of Fat Bikes. Others around the same price had slightly lower component spec or not as forward thinking design. I've had my F5 on a mixture of trail centres, natural, beaches and all sorts. It's a blast to ride in all conditions. Climbing on it is better than some of the so-called "enduro" bikes I've tested recently...which are too slack and have to much suspension IMHO. I can also tell you a rigid Farley will eat up rock gardens on a wet or slippy day that would have other MTBs slipping all over the place. PLUS small kids look at you in awe, women and small animals shrink in terror and other riders look at you in sheer bemusement. Why WOULDN'T you want one? Also...you don't need a bell. People hear you long before they see you. Just get one now. YOU need THIS ! ;-)


I'd scond everything above. The F5 is my second fat bike and I love it. Sold my 29er because I saw no need for it anymore.


----------



## rain100 (Sep 12, 2014)

Estuche said:


> Based on these frame measurements it seems likely that the Farley could fit an Sram XX1 168mm (internal) qfactor crankset, which would provide the lowest qfactor possible at 194mm external (assuming crank arms´thickness at 13mm). Can anyone confirm this? I know that the Farley 8 comes with an Sram crankset, so arguably the pf121 bb is compatible with other Sram cranks, unless the Farley 8 is not press-fit? Anyone knows anything about this possibility??


The previous farleys were all threaded bottom brackets. Sram's pressfit bottom bracket should work in the new farleys. You might be able to use an XX1 or X9 crankset with wolftooth's BB30 direct mount ring: Direct Mount for SRAM BB30 Short Spindle Cranks, boost chainring ? wolftoothcomponents.com

This should provide the correct chainline. I'm very happy with the raceface turbine cranks that came stock on my farley 9, so I won't be making the switch.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

My wife and I are going to check out the 7 and 9.6 tomorrow. May come home with one of each 

Hopefully the shop will be willing to deal on two bikes.


----------



## mr.finn (May 19, 2010)

Sitting in bike store parking lot. Will be picking up my 9.6 shortly. And wouldn't you know... It's snowing out!!! 4-6" expected in our area. Tomorrow is the test ride.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

mr.finn said:


> Sitting in bike store parking lot. Will be picking up my 9.6 shortly. And wouldn't you know... It's snowing out!!! 4-6" expected in our area. Tomorrow is the test ride.


Nice. Which store?

Ill be heading to Colonial in Portsmouth tomorrow. Nice folks and I avoid that pesky sales tax in Maine.


----------



## mr.finn (May 19, 2010)

likeaboss said:


> Nice. Which store?
> 
> Ill be heading to Colonial in Portsmouth tomorrow. Nice folks and I avoid that pesky sales tax in Maine.


Spark down in Taunton, Ma.


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

KantoBoy said:


> This is unfortunate.
> 
> I'm a 7 owner myself and I see tons of 7s everywhere on social media. I'm curious to see how many of the 5s and the 7s were sold so far. Anyone from Trek wanna chime in?


It's a strange choice as the 7 seems the real sweet spot in the range, what's stranger still is they do offer the ultra pricey all carbon 9.8 which I can't see being a big seller. I get the impression at least with the 2015 bikes that very few were shipped to the UK, I preordered my 6 months before it was out and managed to bag one but after that the bike shop said there were none to order at all over winter. I rarely see the Farley's mentioned in the UK fat bike forums either.

John


----------



## SHowley2003 (Feb 21, 2008)

Ranger Pride said:


> So I have looked through the entire 48 pages over the last couple days. I am getting a Farley 5. I will make one change which is to swap to a 1x10 and get the Raceface Aeffect crankset for the F5 using the same one that is on the F7. What I am unclear about is the crankset spindle length. What size is on the F7? My goal is to lower m Q factor.


Honest question. Why swap crank sets? I have an F5 and simply took off the two chai rings and mounted up a RF narrow wide 30t on there. Has worked flawlessly in all conditions from dry tech to 6 inches of fresh powder. Are you looking to go lower than a 30t and need the cinch setup?


----------



## benjyboard (Mar 31, 2004)

Struggling to locate a Farley to throw my leg over for sizing, How's the sizing on the Farley. I generally ride and 18 inch / med bike, the Farley 27.5 seems a bit short. Anyone got a 9.8 and what size did you go for. I'm 5'9" with 30.5 inseam


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

SHowley2003 said:


> Honest question. Why swap crank sets? I have an F5 and simply took off the two chai rings and mounted up a RF narrow wide 30t on there. Has worked flawlessly in all conditions from dry tech to 6 inches of fresh powder. Are you looking to go lower than a 30t and need the cinch setup?


By swapping to the Aeffect crankset and using the 170mm spindle version(same that they use one the F7) it lowers the Q-factor by 20mm which is a big deal for me. I blew out one of my knees, ACL and meniscus, and even after surgery the wide Q-factor of fat bikes can be a problem.


----------



## fatchanceti (Jan 12, 2005)

benjyboard said:


> Struggling to locate a Farley to throw my leg over for sizing, How's the sizing on the Farley. I generally ride and 18 inch / med bike, the Farley 27.5 seems a bit short. Anyone got a 9.8 and what size did you go for. I'm 5'9" with 30.5 inseam


I'm exactly the same size as you. Pretty happily rode a 17.5" Farley 7, position felt good, but would have been easy to stretch out of needed.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

JohnMcL7 said:


> It's a strange choice as the 7 seems the real sweet spot in the range, what's stranger still is they do offer the ultra pricey all carbon 9.8 which I can't see being a big seller. I get the impression at least with the 2015 bikes that very few were shipped to the UK, I preordered my 6 months before it was out and managed to bag one but after that the bike shop said there were none to order at all over winter. I rarely see the Farley's mentioned in the UK fat bike forums either.
> 
> John


There's not many places to get them in the UK. I had to go to a Trek dealer in Belfast who ordered mine in. He said he could get probably the 7 as well but I wasn't so sure as I couldn't find it on any of the online sites. Evans has Farley's in stock but they are Click & Collect which is useless to most people. They won't deliver them which makes me think they don't have them sitting in stock. I've a Farley 5 and the dealer told me he ordered a Farley (maybe carbon model) in for another guy. I haven't seen a any other Trek Farleys near any of the places I ride (Northern Ireland/Donegal)...come to think of the only other fat bikes I've seen are a Surly that some guy round the corner from me "commutes" on, Genesis Carabou in a bike shop and A Fat CAAD that a local bike shop ordered in for someone.


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

I took part in the Strathpuffer as a ten man fat bike team last year (local 24 hour endurance event), we were pretty much the only fat bikes bar a couple of others. I did it again this year but a load more fat bikes, saw one Farley 8, one of the new Cannondale fat bikes, a few Surly's and Caribous plus a good number of On-one Fatty's.

Evans aren't allowed to deliver the Farleys as Trek don't allow dealers to send the bikes, they have to be picked up in person although no stores are showing as having them in stock as you've said.

All of which is a shame as I've been very pleased with the Farley 6.

John


----------



## benjyboard (Mar 31, 2004)

Ordered my Farley 9.8 from my LBS, it should be ready for weekend. Swapped the seam stuff for XT with the exception of the cassette. They are setting it up tubeless for me too


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

JohnMcL7 said:


> I took part in the Strathpuffer as a ten man fat bike team last year (local 24 hour endurance event), we were pretty much the only fat bikes bar a couple of others. I did it again this year but a load more fat bikes, saw one Farley 8, one of the new Cannondale fat bikes, a few Surly's and Caribous plus a good number of On-one Fatty's.
> 
> Evans aren't allowed to deliver the Farleys as Trek don't allow dealers to send the bikes, they have to be picked up in person although no stores are showing as having them in stock as you've said.
> 
> ...


aha this makes sense. I was all ready to buy an On-One Fatty trail until I found out there was a Trek dealer a few miles from me. He said he could order a Farley 5 in no problem and I got it in November. Glad I did too! Didn't really want a Bluto fork on my Fat Bike and I think the F5 is a better bike although the new On-One Fatty Trail is a nice looking bike. I took it to a local trail centre at the weekend and one of the staff said they they had been on a fat bike before but they had never seen tyres like the ones on the F5...he said it was like "DOUBLE FAT"! Made me laugh. Let my pal have a go on it who is an avid DH/Enduro rider. He gave the best description of riding a Trek Farley I have heard so far..."It's makes you feel like you're a Tank Commander."


----------



## rain100 (Sep 12, 2014)

Does anyone know the weight of the Wampa 27.5 carbon rim?


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

rain100 said:


> Does anyone know the weight of the Wampa 27.5 carbon rim?


Rims with out hubs? Or complete wheels?


----------



## benjyboard (Mar 31, 2004)

benjyboard said:


> Ordered my Farley 9.8 from my LBS, it should be ready for weekend. Swapped the seam stuff for XT with the exception of the cassette. They are setting it up tubeless for me too


She's arrived, big thanks to Cookson Cycles their efforts in helping me make my mind up,for getting the bike in so quickly and building it up as soon as it arrived.

Here's the first few pics


SRAM gears swapped for XT


----------



## rain100 (Sep 12, 2014)

FT251 said:


> Rims with out hubs? Or complete wheels?


preferably rim only. I think someone weighed the wampa complete wheels earlier in the thread.


----------



## jcollinsia (Jul 26, 2011)

Picking up my Farley 5 at lunch today! Just in time for a weekend of single digit temps and wind chill advisories.


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

jcollinsia said:


> Picking up my Farley 5 at lunch today! Just in time for a weekend of single digit temps and wind chill advisories.


Sounds perfect.
I was out in -13C last night and rode down to -32C last winter.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

JackP42 said:


> Sounds perfect.
> I was out in -13C last night and rode down to -32C last winter.


i was out for a few hours last night 3F so -16C it was a great night to be out riding the poto and some forbidden horse trails!! :nono:


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

jcollinsia said:


> Picking up my Farley 5 at lunch today! Just in time for a weekend of single digit temps and wind chill advisories.


My wife is picking up her 9.6 tomorrow. Single digits in Maine this weekend with 30mph gusts. Wind chill well below zero. I am flying from Norway to Boston tomorrow and expect to be trashed from the jetlag Sunday. But I can use the time to set us up tubeless and install my new bar and grips. Monday looks promising though.

Heading to Kingdom Trails in a few weeks for the annual Winterbike festival.


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

likeaboss said:


> My wife is picking up her 9.6 tomorrow. Single digits in Maine this weekend with 30mph gusts. Wind chill well below zero. I am flying from Norway to Boston tomorrow and expect to be trashed from the jetlag Sunday. But I can use the time to set us up tubeless and install my new bar and grips. Monday looks promising though.
> 
> Heading to Kingdom Trails in a few weeks for the annual Winterbike festival.


I got the 9.6 some months ago, and I just asked the LBS to set it up tubeless when they built the bike, which they did and only charged me for the tubeless stems and Stans. Might me an option and be one less thing for you to have to do. I have had zero problems with them tubeless.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

jrogersAK said:


> I got the 9.6 some months ago, and I just asked the LBS to set it up tubeless when they built the bike, which they did and only charged me for the tubeless stems and Stans. Might me an option and be one less thing for you to have to do. I have had zero problems with them tubeless.


Thanks jrogersAK. I enjoy doing the work on my bikes. I have been running tubeless in my 29er since 2011.


----------



## benjyboard (Mar 31, 2004)

Farley 9.8 first ride today, behaved differently to what I was expecting. It climbed well but doesn't roll well at slow speeds (no surprise there). I was shocked at how nimble the bike was, not bothered with any set up tweaks other than seat position and the bike was comfy from the offset. The seat is comfy, no numbness and I've not ridden for a couple of months. Would have got one of my fastes times on a short downhill section if I hadn't slowed down for a couple of ramblers. Plenty of people (bikers and ramblers) made comments about the tyres and more surprising the gearing. Felt like the first time I ever took a mountain bike out. I was concerned about Q factor and the width of the rear end, I actually found it to be a comfortable pedalling position and never clipped a stay. I have XTR pedals fitted and they are really nice to use, solid but easy to click in and out of.



Here's the bike all clean and under guard, ready for next ride.


----------



## tagabalay (Aug 25, 2011)

my knees took forever to adjust to the wider q factor. i have the same bike + xt pedals. i changed the 70mm to 80mm stem inverted + flat bars to get a xc race bike feel. enjoy your new ride.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

benjyboard said:


> Farley 9.8 first ride today, behaved differently to what I was expecting. It climbed well but doesn't roll well at slow speeds (no surprise there). I was shocked at how nimble the bike was, not bothered with any set up tweaks other than seat position and the bike was comfy from the offset. The seat is comfy, no numbness and I've not ridden for a couple of months. Would have got one of my fastes times on a short downhill section if I hadn't slowed down for a couple of ramblers. Plenty of people (bikers and ramblers) made comments about the tyres and more surprising the gearing. Felt like the first time I ever took a mountain bike out. I was concerned about Q factor and the width of the rear end, I actually found it to be a comfortable pedalling position and never clipped a stay. I have XTR pedals fitted and they are really nice to use, solid but easy to click in and out of.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the bike all clean and under guard, ready for next ride.


The more I see this bike the more I want one

Marty-MJ


----------



## samiam2714 (Feb 14, 2016)

apologies if this is the wrong spot. I just got a 2015 Farley 5 I am wondering what my rear rack options are? Salsa was the one I saw but don't know the size I need.


----------



## RPK3 (Aug 18, 2005)

benjyboard, the bike looks good! I've also made some mods to my new 9.6. I swapped to XT brakes after one ride on the stock SRAM DB3 brakes which felt so inconsistent. I also added a shorter stem, WTB Pure saddle, 9point8 dropper post and converted to tubeless for the 2nd ride. I did one steep ride without a dropper and was shocked how uncomfortable it felt on steep descents and tech. How did I ever survive riding without one for 15 years?!? I'll probably be adding a suspension fork at some point but I'm shocked to find that the dropper post is my higher priority.

I can see from your pics that you still have the plastic spacers pushing the axle all the way back. This was one of the few changes I made before the 1st ride. Even all the way forward, this bike has the longest chainstays of any bike I own. It seems some deep snow riders like long chainstays but I don't get the impression that this is your reason. I can't see any reason not to slam the axle forward to the stops.



benjyboard said:


> Farley 9.8 first ride today, behaved differently to what I was expecting. It climbed well but doesn't roll well at slow speeds (no surprise there). I was shocked at how nimble the bike was, not bothered with any set up tweaks other than seat position and the bike was comfy from the offset. The seat is comfy, no numbness and I've not ridden for a couple of months. Would have got one of my fastes times on a short downhill section if I hadn't slowed down for a couple of ramblers. Plenty of people (bikers and ramblers) made comments about the tyres and more surprising the gearing. Felt like the first time I ever took a mountain bike out. I was concerned about Q factor and the width of the rear end, I actually found it to be a comfortable pedalling position and never clipped a stay. I have XTR pedals fitted and they are really nice to use, solid but easy to click in and out of.
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the bike all clean and under guard, ready for next ride.


----------



## benjyboard (Mar 31, 2004)

RPK3 said:


> benjyboard, the bike looks good! I've also made some mods to my new 9.6. I swapped to XT brakes after one ride on the stock SRAM DB3 brakes which felt so inconsistent. I also added a shorter stem, WTB Pure saddle, 9point8 dropper post and converted to tubeless for the 2nd ride. I did one steep ride without a dropper and was shocked how uncomfortable it felt on steep descents and tech. How did I ever survive riding without one for 15 years?!? I'll probably be adding a suspension fork at some point but I'm shocked to find that the dropper post is my higher priority.
> 
> I can see from your pics that you still have the plastic spacers pushing the axle all the way back. This was one of the few changes I made before the 1st ride. Even all the way forward, this bike has the longest chainstays of any bike I own. It seems some deep snow riders like long chainstays but I don't get the impression that this is your reason. I can't see any reason not to slam the axle forward to the stops.


I hear you on the drop outs, I've not tweaked anything on the bike yet, yes the wheel needs to further under and it'll climb better. I'm looking to add either 27.5 plus or 29 plus for the summer, any thoughts? A dropper is on my list, but the Thomson covert dropper is on back order, plus I wanted to see how the bike ride in its "pure state".


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Who is up for a Presidents' Day POTO ride? I have the day off but need to bring my wife's vehicle to the dealership in the morning and was thinking 10 or 11.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

Setup my Jakalope 27.5s on my new 9.6 tubeless yesterday. Pleasantly surprised to find rim tape already installed. Pulled the tube without pulling the tire, installed valve, added sealant and inflated with my new flash charge pump. Easiest and quickest tubeless setup ever.

The downside is that it looks like it would be a challenge to reinstall a tube trail side without some really good irons.


----------



## Fat Dan (Sep 9, 2015)

benjyboard said:


> Struggling to locate a Farley to throw my leg over for sizing, How's the sizing on the Farley. I generally ride and 18 inch / med bike, the Farley 27.5 seems a bit short. Anyone got a 9.8 and what size did you go for. I'm 5'9" with 30.5 inseam


I'm a similar size to you (but metric), slightly shorter but with longer inseam. The 17.5 looked way small, like a trials bike, when I picked it up at the shop. Like a lot of dimensions in the fat bike world though, appears disproportionate at first but it fit me just fine once riding and now my other bike looks very skinny and tall. The low-looking top tube is to compensate for the extra height of the wheel/tyre combo. Once set-up 1x, tubeless and rear axle forwards, my F5 is one of the most fun-handling bikes I've ever had.


----------



## benjyboard (Mar 31, 2004)

*Farley fit*



Fat Dan said:


> I'm a similar size to you (but metric), slightly shorter but with longer inseam. The 17.5 looked way small, like a trials bike, when I picked it up at the shop. Like a lot of dimensions in the fat bike world though, appears disproportionate at first but it fit me just fine once riding and now my other bike looks very skinny and tall. The low-looking top tube is to compensate for the extra height of the wheel/tyre combo. Once set-up 1x, tubeless and rear axle forwards, my F5 is one of the most fun-handling bikes I've ever had.


I totally agree with the sizing, the 17.5 looked way to small, it actually has similar dims to my med Ibis mojo hd although the top tube on the Farley is slightly longer. The bike is fun out on the trail, not as floaty as I was expecting, managed to carve a hairpin bend much faster than on my FS.
I'm going to set up with 29 plus wheels for summer.

Enjoy your Farley


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

benjyboard said:


> I hear you on the drop outs, I've not tweaked anything on the bike yet, yes the wheel needs to further under and it'll climb better. I'm looking to add either 27.5 plus or 29 plus for the summer, any thoughts? A dropper is on my list, but the Thomson covert dropper is on back order, plus I wanted to see how the bike ride in its "pure state".


Stay away from the RockShox Reverb. It's totally useless when cold.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Rode a 5 this past weekend while helping my wife decide which size she needs.
I was surprised at just how different the 5 feels from my 7 (and we had a 7 there we were riding as well just for fit purposes) 
It's surprising how much heavier the 5 feels, and less nimble. The combination of the build kit and that fork definitely has an impact. Even she noticed right off the bat switching back and forth between the two.

I'm getting her a 5, but definitely converting to 1x and getting rid of those boat anchor Avid brakes in favor of LX, and maybe a carbon bar.


----------



## yamaha46 (Jul 17, 2009)

The 5 has a wider Q factor also so that may be part of it.
Do you know the weight of the 5 forks?
And the 7's Carbon forks weight?


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

yamaha46 said:


> The 5 has a wider Q factor also so that may be part of it.
> Do you know the weight of the 5 forks?
> And the 7's Carbon forks weight?


I liked the color of the 5 better so that is what I bought. Got a great deal on a carbon fork(the stock fork weight 1150 grams) and put the same crank on it that is on the F7 to lower my q-factor and convert to 1x10. Now it sits just under 30 pounds and feels great. When I go tubeless I'll drop close to 2 more pounds. Lots of deals out there on carbon forks.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yamaha, I'm not sure of the weight of the fork on the 7.

Ranger - nice. I liked the color of the 5 too, but there's no way I was going to buy a 5 and make a 7 out of just over color. For me that would have been a silly waste of money all things considered. The purple is so nice in person - I was converted immediately after seeing it in person. For my wife's 5 I'll use a Wolftooth to get her 1x11 and change the bottom bracket to get the 7's Q factor. 

Which carbon fork did you get and what is the axle to crown length?


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

Gambit21 said:


> Yamaha, I'm not sure of the weight of the fork on the 7.
> 
> Ranger - nice. I liked the color of the 5 too, but there's no way I was going to buy a 5 and make a 7 out of just over color. For me that would have been a silly waste of money all things considered. The purple is so nice in person - I was converted immediately after seeing it in person. For my wife's 5 I'll use a Wolftooth to get her 1x11 and change the bottom bracket to get the 7's Q factor.
> 
> Which carbon fork did you get and what is the axle to crown length?


The shop I bought the bike at had a left over 9zero7. I'm not sure the axle to crown but it did have 135 spacing which was critical to using the current front wheel. All I had to buy was endocarps to convert the hub to thru axle.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Someone asked about my rack:

I could not find a rack that just bolts on that met my requirements so I had to improvise. Even the two Trek reps I asked at a fat bike demo event shrugged their shoulders when I asked what rack would fit the Farley. 
There were some other options that I found (Salsa Navigator) but my LBS ordered the Blackburn for me so I made it work.

Most racks I saw had the rubber mounting points that bolt on the frame to mount the stanchions. I didn't want that. Racks like the Navigator needed a different seat clamp that doubled as the mount for the stanchions. This eliminated the quick release and cost money. Didn't want that.









A. The top of the rack is separate from the sides and the width can be adjusted. (I adjusted as narrow as I could so my panniers would still clip in) The top is currently mounted backwards. When the top is mounted correctly it sits too far forward under the seat and my bag would not sit on top of the rack. So I spun it around. But then the there was a tab for a light where the arrow points so I cut that off.

B. The excess bar stock for the width adjustment would not allow the fender to sit in the gap and it rubbed on the tire. Cut them so they were flush so the fender was able to sit 1/2" higher and clear the tire.

C. Stanchions bolted to an existing hole in the Farley 17.5" frame. The stanchion's lengths are adjustable so I got them as close to the tire as I could so the rack was as narrow as possible. (NOTE: The small Farley frame does not have this mount location)

D. There were round pieces/spacers on the inside of this mounting bar that made the side parts of the rack 1/2" wider on both sides. My boot caught on the rack a few times. Cut them off flush.

Over all I am really pleased with it now. It's solid and comes off with three bolts when not needed and the mud shovel stays put.


----------



## spadedracer (Feb 5, 2016)

Jeff_G said:


> Someone asked about my rack:


Thank you for the informative post! I plan on copying you sometime soon.


----------



## krelldog (Feb 17, 2015)

I'm 5'6" and rode a 17.5" Farley 9.6 with a 60mm stem and it fits perfectly.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Added some 29+ wheels first ride tomorrow on them


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

Can someone please explain what I need to convert my Farley 5 with the ride cranks to the setup the 7 is using? I want to narrow my Q factor. I am currently running a 28t 64 bcd ring up front 1x10. The 5 uses a 121mm bb and the 7 uses a 100mm bb is that correct? If someone could give me a more detailed idea of what I need to convert that would help. I know I need to upgrade to the Affect crank, just not sure why.


----------



## Haste11 (Jul 5, 2014)

The Affect crank uses a direct mount chain rain so you can "flip" it outwards. The Aeffect spindle length is shorter then the "Rides" thus giving you a shorter Q factor, the flipped chainring keeps a proper chain line.

I'm not sure if you can use your existing bottom bracket though.

You would need for sure;
-170 rear spaced Aeffect crankset
-direct mount chain ring(Aeffects can fit 26 - 30)
-new bottom bracket(not sure)

I did the same mod to my 190 rear spaced fat bike to go 1x10. Went from a 228mm Q factor to 205mm. Huge difference, I ran a 26t ring for the winter and have a 28t for the summer. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

Haste11 said:


> The Affect crank uses a direct mount chain rain so you can "flip" it outwards. The Aeffect spindle length is shorter then the "Rides" thus giving you a shorter Q factor, the flipped chainring keeps a proper chain line.
> 
> I'm not sure if you can use your existing bottom bracket though.
> 
> ...


thanks, yes, I found some info buried in this thread:

The Farley 2016 7, 9, 9.6, and 9.8 use a raceface 169mm spindle that is for normally used on 177mm spaced fat bikes; however, when you flip the direct mount ring so that it moves the chainline out, you have the correct chainline for a 197mm rear end.

They even post a chart about all their fatbike chainlines here: http://raceface.com/comp/pdf/FatBike...-Chainline.pdf

Here Kristofer Henry of 44 bikes illustrates a flipped chainring of Raceface manufacture, as well as one from Wolf Tooth Components:

__
https://flic.kr/p/16139981105

In short, if you want the least q factor possible, build with a race face crankset + 169mm spindle + direct mount narrow wide ring.

I cant believe shorter crank arms narrow the q factor, but this certainly would help with pedal strikes- I hit my peddles a lot. Thanks for the repy, I am going to go this route, just got to find out if I need a new bb!


----------



## Haste11 (Jul 5, 2014)

If I had to bet money, I would imagine it would use the same bottom bracket. Especially considering the "Rides" and "Aeffects" both have a 24mm EXI spindle diameter.

If you were wanting to run the turbines or next SLs you would need a different BB for sure as they are 30mm in diameter. Hope this helps, it's the best upgrade I've done to my fat bike for sure.

Edit: this is what I used http://www.raceface.com/comp/inst/Crank_Q-factors_and_chainlines.pdf

The ride spindle is XCF 190(190) 228mm Q
Aeffect XCF 100(167) 205mm Q as seen on page 1 of the PDF

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

Haste11 said:


> If I had to bet money, I would imagine it would use the same bottom bracket. Especially considering the "Rides" and "Aeffects" both have a 24mm EXI spindle diameter.
> 
> If you were wanting to run the turbines or next SLs you would need a different BB for sure as they are 30mm in diameter. Hope this helps, it's the best upgrade I've done to my fat bike for sure.
> 
> ...


I had my shop put the Aeffect crankset on my Farley 5. It uses the same bottom bracket. Well worth the swap.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Fuel29 (Feb 12, 2016)

Just picked up the 9.6 and couldn't be happier and I couldn't be more sad. Happy because the bike is badass. Sad because I really wanted to ride in some snow and test this baby out, however, Minnesota has decided to melt all of my snow and give me rain =( Pics to follow. Upgraded to tubeless right out of the gate and although I have not yet weighed it, I can feel the difference. I should also note that I test rode the Farley 5 and the Farley 7 (for about a week each) in some decent snow on a few single-track trails (Lebanon Hills and Theodore Wirth Park. The Farley 5 after riding it once just felt too heavy so I tried out the 7. The 7 was a night and day difference (IMO) and certainly having the 26x4.7 made riding stupidly easy and pleasant, but I still wanted to test the 9.6 before deciding on one. 

Rode the 9.6 and that is night and day difference, again, with the 27.5x3.8. The reason I went with the 9.6 is primarily because the carbon frame and the 27.5 wheel base. Regardless of whether or not I kept the 7 or the 9.6, I planned on getting a second set of wheels to maximize the potential of the bikes. So winter 2017 I'll see if I need to get a set of 26x5's for winter purposes. 

I will have to follow up after a few rides, however my first impression is... it is fun! Like I said, I need some heavy snowfall here to put this through the ringer.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

I've heard a couple people say this now, that the 5 is heavy compared to the 7. Coming from most aluminum fat bikes tho, I think many will find the 5 still light and nimble in comparison. I rode an aluminum Beargrease X5, Framed Alaskan & Wolftrax & MN 2.0, as well as the Mukluk, quite a bit alongside the F5 and found the 5 to be worlds ahead in terms of nimbleness and responsiveness. Just want to make the distinction clear that the 5 is still no slouch whatsoever. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

I have the 9.6 as well, and I enjoy it but have the same problem with a lack of studded options. I am trying to hang on for the winter and see if other good options come out, or if I am better off with a set of 26 inch wheels for winter. Some of the recent posts with larger size prototype 27.5 tires have left me hopeful, but if I break something before they come out (like a bone), those wheels and tires will look cheap. I have lightened mine up a bit. I am down to 26.5lbs, and the next big thing will be some carbon rims, either 27.5 or 26. Anybody with a clear crystal ball please chime in. I sent HED an Email a while back asking about 27.5 x 80mm rims and I never heard back, which i not surprising.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

jrogersAK said:


> I have the 9.6 as well, and I enjoy it but have the same problem with a lack of studded options. I am trying to hang on for the winter and see if other good options come out, or if I am better off with a set of 26 inch wheels for winter. Some of the recent posts with larger size prototype 27.5 tires have left me hopeful, but if I break something before they come out (like a bone), those wheels and tires will look cheap. I have lightened mine up a bit. I am down to 26.5lbs, and the next big thing will be some carbon rims, either 27.5 or 26. Anybody with a clear crystal ball please chime in. I sent HED an Email a while back asking about 27.5 x 80mm rims and I never heard back, which i not surprising.


You can buy 27.5x80 Wampa wheels right now from Trek/Bontrager


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

FT251 said:


> You can buy 27.5x80 Wampa wheels right now from Trek/Bontrager


Really? Where? I looked at their website, and they only show the Jackalope (aluminum) wheel.

Bontrager Jackalope TLR 26 Fat Bike Wheel | Bike wheels | Cycling components | Equipment | Trek Bikes


----------



## Fuel29 (Feb 12, 2016)

Spot on. The trek line up for Fat Bikes is sweet across the board! I have a nice healthy tax return coming and a birthday, so i treated myself. I have to say the F7 Purps grew on me while riding it, but I wanted a solid platform I can build on over the next 10 years and the carbon frame is a dope place to start.


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

jrogersAK said:


> Really? Where? I looked at their website, and they only show the Jackalope (aluminum) wheel.
> 
> Bontrager Jackalope TLR 26 Fat Bike Wheel | Bike wheels | Cycling components | Equipment | Trek Bikes


contact your local Trek dealer, he can get them for you.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Didn't someone post some prototype 27.5"x4.8 tires that Trek was testing? That might be really interesting.

J.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Fuel29 said:


> Spot on. The trek line up for Fat Bikes is sweet across the board! I have a nice healthy tax return coming and a birthday, so i treated myself. I have to say the F7 Purps grew on me while riding it, but I wanted a solid platform I can build on over the next 10 years and the carbon frame is a dope place to start.


True dat. I even rode my BIL's Fatboy quite a bit and am so happy I went with a Farley.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## frank daleview (Jan 23, 2004)

benjyboard said:


> Struggling to locate a Farley to throw my leg over for sizing, How's the sizing on the Farley. I generally ride and 18 inch / med bike, the Farley 27.5 seems a bit short. Anyone got a 9.8 and what size did you go for. I'm 5'9" with 30.5 inseam


I had struggled with size. I am just a touch over 5'10" with long arms and felt the 17.5 was way too short. I ended up with a 19.5". I have an 80 cm stem on it and it seems to fit well. It seems like there is a chasm of a gap in terms of top tube length between the 17.5 and the 19.5; the 17.5 has a 593 cm TT and the 19.5 has a 630 TT length. That's nearly 2"! My current ride summer ride is a Niner One 9 RDO and it's TT is 605 but still the 17.5" felt way short.


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

hoboscratch said:


> I've heard a couple people say this now, that the 5 is heavy compared to the 7. Coming from most aluminum fat bikes tho, I think many will find the 5 still light and nimble in comparison. I rode an aluminum Beargrease X5, Framed Alaskan & Wolftrax & MN 2.0, as well as the Mukluk, quite a bit alongside the F5 and found the 5 to be worlds ahead in terms of nimbleness and responsiveness. Just want to make the distinction clear that the 5 is still no slouch whatsoever.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I bought the 5 and made 3 changes which still put my total spend significantly below the 7. Carbon fork, raceface Aeffect crank, and 1x10. Brought it down to 30 pounds from 33. When I go tubeless I will lose another 1.5 pounds. Not bad for this bike.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Couple of new things I've discovered about my Farley 5 over the last few months:

-LOVE how little tyre pressure goes down in fat bikes compared to road bikes. left the bike for a month 8psi had dropped to 6/7.
-Thick mud is so much fun on the Farley. Sections I would never have attempted before are now possible. That's not to say your invincible as I was riding in dark and turned too sharp in VERY thick gloop which did not work out well
-As someone pointed out to me on this forum. Fork vibration/buzz to the hands can be greatly reduced by dropping PSI and fitting some softer grips
-Coasting most people think you are on some sort of electric bike
-Topeak Saddlebag large holds a fat bike tube pefectly


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

Ranger Pride said:


> I bought the 5 and made 3 changes which still put my total spend significantly below the 7. Carbon fork, raceface Aeffect crank, and 1x10. Brought it down to 30 pounds from 33. When I go tubeless I will lose another 1.5 pounds. Not bad for this bike.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


what fork did you buy? Did you end up converting to 150mm front thru axle?


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Couple of new things I've discovered about my Farley 5 over the last few months:
> 
> -LOVE how little tyre pressure goes down in fat bikes compared to road bikes. left the bike for a month 8psi had dropped to 6/7.
> -Thick mud is so much fun on the Farley. Sections I would never have attempted before are now possible. That's not to say your invincible as I was riding in dark and turned too sharp in VERY thick gloop which did not work out well
> ...


I put a carbon race face bar on mine, helped significantly with bar vibration!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I put an Enve carbon bar on my Farley 7 - worthwhile upgrade.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> I put an Enve carbon bar on my Farley 7 - worthwhile upgrade.


I have to educate myself on bar rise, stem size etc but....

Did you get the Enve RSR with the 23 mm rise? Stock I think is 15. I feel like I would be more comfortable with my bar up and/or back a bit. Can you feel the difference?


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Ranger Pride said:


> I bought the 5 and made 3 changes which still put my total spend significantly below the 7. Carbon fork, raceface Aeffect crank, and 1x10. Brought it down to 30 pounds from 33. When I go tubeless I will lose another 1.5 pounds. Not bad for this bike.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Can you notice the fork? Some reason im wanting a carbon fork for my 6.... Mainly looks department lol. Probably go with a sarma 135qr one not the trek.


----------



## Aceldama (Jan 18, 2005)

solarplex said:


> Can you notice the fork? Some reason im wanting a carbon fork for my 6.... Mainly looks department lol. Probably go with a sarma 135qr one not the trek.


Can you get away with the Sarma fork on the Farley? The axle-to-crown on the Sarma is listed at 465mm where I believe the Trek fork(s) are 490mm.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Aceldama said:


> Can you get away with the Sarma fork on the Farley? The axle-to-crown on the Sarma is listed at 465mm where I believe the Trek fork(s) are 490mm.


**** your right. 490mm well scrap that! Have to go with the bontrager fork and hub adapters. Might as well go bluto then.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

jdaigneault said:


> I put a carbon race face bar on mine, helped significantly with bar vibration!


thanks may try that next. Thought about trying a carbon fork also although would LOVE to get one of those Lauf forks but they are way too expensive.

I do find the AL fork a bit unforgiving and it does get a fair bit of vibration and scraping when sand etc stuck in calipers.


----------



## verslowrdr (Mar 22, 2004)

Frame bag Q: I've just picked up a 17.5" Farley 5 and would like to get a frame bag for it to throw a tube into... OK, and maybe beer, lol... but it looks like the geometry is an odd fit for the Revelate ranger series. I could be wrong though. Anyone have a bead on something that would work?


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

I use a cheap Roswheel frame bag to carry a tube, pump & a few tools (no beer). It does just about leave room for a drink bottle on the seatpost (which you could fill with beer if you wanted*  )









Not the best photo, but hopefully you can see how it fits (mine is a 17.5" frame, too).










NB put some helitape, or something around the frame where the bag straps go - the paint will wear through after one ride if you don't (from bitter experience  )

(* I had a friend who rode road bikes who used to fill his water bottle with red wine. He took a wine glass along and filled it up whenever he stopped.)


----------



## pipes10 (Mar 11, 2007)

fat_biike_boy said:


> ----------
> It will take about 22 days for them to be made and 3 days for shipping.. so figure about 4 weeks. yes, I would ship to the UK... the timing doesn't seem to work for you though. Have fun with the new Bluto.


Did these ever take shape? Has anyone fitted a Bluto on the stock Farley 5 hub? If so, which adapters were used for the hub and caliper?


----------



## Fuel29 (Feb 12, 2016)

*9.6 Downhill riding at a ski resort! Spirit Mt. Duluth*

Got to ride Spirit Mountain in Duluth, MN today. They run their chairlifts and a few runs for fat bikers. Really got to test out the 9.6 and it didn't disappoint. It took a few runs to get the PSI dialed in but ended up with 5 front and 6 back. I was initially worried that that the 27.5/3.8 would slip a little, especially going 24mph downhill on a ski-hill, but once I got the tire pressure figured out it was perfect


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> I have to educate myself on bar rise, stem size etc but....
> 
> Did you get the Enve RSR with the 23 mm rise? Stock I think is 15. I feel like I would be more comfortable with my bar up and/or back a bit. Can you feel the difference?


Yep.
For me the difference is in slightly better damping, I don't notice the rise so much.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Test drove the Farley 7. Looking for a winter ride on singletrack and backup for occasional summer use. BUT after the test ride I can see myself riding the Farley much more in the summer. Summer rig is the epic Giant Reign 27.5.

I am torn between a Rocky Mountain Blizzard 50, Kona Wo, and Farley 7. All bike are 20-25% off right now too.

Rocky Mountain Blizzard 50 (*$250 more than F7*): 
120mm Bluto RL, 12x197 rear, SLX/XT grouppo 1x10 (24 x 11-36), 4.7" Vee Bulldozers and 33lbs. It feels very similar to Farley 7 and a popular local brand here. I felt good on the XL but the standover was a nut hugger. The 1x10 24 ring will limit summer range. Will try Lrg next week. The bike was made to shread the Canadian Rockies winter. The *2 Fat 2 Furious video* is epic and local terrain to me:





Kona Wo ($400 less than F7):
ridig fork 150mm thru axle Bluto ready, Joytech 190mm, Deore/LX grouppo 2x10 (11-36), 4.8" Jumbo Jims. The bike was very fast and had a very solid feel. The Jumbo Jims are a very quick tire, but heard they are lacking in snow? Unsure.

I really enjoyed the Farley 7 ride, but on limited riding terrain in town. I tried tires at 6psi and again at 10/12psi. On the pavement i had the tractor feel at 6psi, on dirt/grass it mostly disappeared. 10/12 fixed it on pavement. dirt trails and elevation near the LBS but ultra smooth.

I'm leaning towards the Farley - the spec with 1x11 is perfect. Ability to run SNOWSHOE 2XL 5", plus 27.5+, 29+ options. Dropper post and ready to rip.

I just feel the Rocky Mountain Blizzard is right there too but the 1x10 24t wont do in the summer. A oneUp 42t and 30t chainring adds $200 more. So $450 over the Farley 7 rigid. Bluto is $650CDN here, but I dought I would upgrade this season.

Any Thoughts?


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

Hi

Here's my Farley 5 with some updates:









- Carbon fork
- Shimano M8000 group set with brakes (1x11, race face 30T in front)
- Surly orange rim strip + tubeless
- SQLab Active saddle
- next update...brake rotors to icetech 180mm

Awesome bike with updates!


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

Another view...


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

geop - the SLX/XT on the Rocky Mountain is nice, plus you have the Bluto. It's not a brand I was able to test ride around here though so I can't comment on feel/handling, etc.

For me, not wanting a Bluto at this point, getting the Farley 7 and swapping to XT brakes and Ice Tech rotors was the answer. It's absolutely the best I could have done.
It's light, nimble, fast, and the carbon fork (and added carbon bar) provide enough damping for most of the Pacific Northwest single track that I ride. Loamy, with a root here, a rock there.
You can't go wrong with the 7, but that Blizzard seems tempting as well, and swapping to an XT 11 spd cassette is not an expensive proposition.

I'm taking a wait and see approach to putting a suspension fork on the 7.
It might happen if something better/stiffer than the Bluto comes along. If not I'm happy with the carbon fork.


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

jpaa said:


> Hi
> 
> Here's my Farley 5 with some updates:
> 
> ...


Very nice! What carbon fork did you go with and what does the bike now weigh?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## glockrocket17 (Aug 26, 2015)

Geop... I was looking at the rocky mountain too along with a bunch of other bikes but after I rode the farley and after reading a bunch of reviews and the build I was pretty much sold. I'm still up in the air on a suspension fork. Other plans are possibly 29+ as well for it because it is my only bike.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

*Fitted a Bluto...*

Well, I tried - riding with a rigid fork was OK, but when things got fast and/or bumpy it took its toll on my neck and shoulders...

Sadly nobody makes adaptors to take the stock 135mm QR hub out to 150mm for a Bluto fork.

So, I called in a favour from a mate and he made me these:










They replace the 135mm QR end caps to take a 15 x 150 maxle:










I also needed a post-post brake mount (rather than IS-post), spacers to move the disc rotor out and longer bolts to suit. (I'd already fitted a 180mm front rotor rather than the stock 160mm).










There's a 5mm and a 2.5mm spacer in the photo which I planned to use together to make up the (theoretical) 7.5mm difference. In the event, the 2.5mm spacer wasn't needed.

Brake side of front hub with no adaptors:










With 5mm spacer in place.










Initially I also fitted a 2.5mm spacer. This put the disc rotor *very* close to the fork, so I took it off again and was able to align the caliper and disc quite comfortably without it. Also, the adaptor needs to be fitted before the spacer :-[



















Similar on the opposite side










I dropped the old fork out and swapped the crown race lower bearing seat to the Blutos










(Gonna need more spacers)










I was resigned to sawing off the steerer freehand, but another mate heard about what I was doing and volunteered his chopping-things-off-square gizmo which worked a treat:










Gulp!










I used a length of studding to draw in the star-nut, rather than trying to juggle a hammer, the fork and the nut with only two hands.










The end result:














































Looks smart (to me) and, on a quick test ride, it feels much smoother. I'll probably get some shorter disc mount bolts in due course, and might flip the stem back up and cut a little off the steerer, but otherwise, I think it's done.

The stock fork / caliper mount was ~1.09kg. The Bluto, after cutting the steerer and fitting the star nut, with the equivalent caliper mount was 1.75 kg, so the Bluto adds about 0.7kg to the bike, allowing for the difference in weight between the QR skewer and the maxle.

The rigid fork has the same A-C as a 100mm Bluto with 20% sag. I opted for a 120mm fork (moar is betterer, isn't it?) but I'm running 25% sag at the moment, so the front end sits about 15mm higher than stock when riding. I doubt I'll notice it...

Hopefully of interest to someone


----------



## pipes10 (Mar 11, 2007)

Misterg - That's exactly what I was looking for. Unfortunately, I don't have access to anyone who can make them.


----------



## PBL450 (Nov 3, 2015)

Ranger Pride said:


> Very nice! What carbon fork did you go with and what does the bike now weigh?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Same questions here! Interested in the same mods...


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> geop - the SLX/XT on the Rocky Mountain is nice, plus you have the Bluto. It's not a brand I was able to test ride around here though so I can't comment on feel/handling, etc.
> 
> For me, not wanting a Bluto at this point, getting the Farley 7 and swapping to XT brakes and Ice Tech rotors was the answer. It's absolutely the best I could have done.
> It's light, nimble, fast, and the carbon fork (and added carbon bar) provide enough damping for most of the Pacific Northwest single track that I ride. Loamy, with a root here, a rock there.
> ...


Thanks Gambit21 :thumbsup:. I am going with the Farley 7. Love the Rocky Blizzard but issues with the rear hub failures is concerning. Too much to love on the Farley to pass it up. I am now on the "wait and see" list for a suspension fork now too. Ha


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

glockrocket17 said:


> Geop... I was looking at the rocky mountain too along with a bunch of other bikes but after I rode the farley and after reading a bunch of reviews and the build I was pretty much sold. I'm still up in the air on a suspension fork. Other plans are possibly 29+ as well for it because it is my only bike.


Couldnt agree more. I am going with the Farley 7. Thanks glockrocket :thumbsup:


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Out for a perfect morning snow ride before the melt today and my next sl cranks failed!!! Pedal on the ground attached to my shoe!!
















:madman: crappy end to a great morning single leg pedal back to my truck


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

Ranger Pride said:


> Very nice! What carbon fork did you go with and what does the bike now weigh?Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Hi,

I have the Bontrager Haru Pro fork. The weight of the bike is 13.5kg without the pedals. What is it - 29lb? My previous bike was the Fatboy and the weight was 14kg. Before you ask why to change the bike, here it is:
- Fatboy goes like a wolverine in the snow
- Farley accelerates and moves like a bunny

I like bunny style 

-jp


----------



## Bizarro (Apr 20, 2006)

Anyone hear of any other 27.5 tire choices coming out for the Farley... got a Farley 9 and love it ...had a bud on 26 rolling Daryl on the front for a while with adapters ...etc.. and just changed back to the 3.8... but just curious on what's in the works for that on that rim in the 27.5 size? 


cheers!


----------



## jrogersAK (Sep 17, 2015)

Bizarro said:


> Anyone hear of any other 27.5 tire choices coming out for the Farley... got a Farley 9 and love it ...had a bud on 26 rolling Daryl on the front for a while with adapters ...etc.. and just changed back to the 3.8... but just curious on what's in the works for that on that rim in the 27.5 size?
> 
> cheers!


There is a post on a thread on here somewhere showing a larger (4.8"?) 27.5 prototype in some race, so it is my expectation that it is getting wider. Bontrager also has a studded 26" tire out this year, and my LBS said that they will be offering this in 27.5 studded by next fall.


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

tadraper said:


> Out for a perfect morning snow ride before the melt today and my next sl cranks failed!!! Pedal on the ground attached to my shoe!!
> 
> View attachment 1054978
> 
> ...


Did the thread strip out of the crank arm?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Ranger Pride said:


> Did the thread strip out of the crank arm?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The part the the pedal threads into ripped out of the pedal. still waiting to hear back from the shop if it is warranty or not, i'll be super pissed if RF does not cover this not like anything i did riding this bike caused the issue.

T


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Misterg said:


> Well, I tried - riding with a rigid fork was OK, but when things got fast and/or bumpy it took its toll on my neck and shoulders...
> 
> Sadly nobody makes adaptors to take the stock 135mm QR hub out to 150mm for a Bluto fork.
> 
> ...


Very interesting ! I would like to stick a Bluto or maybe even a Lauf Carbonara on my F5 one day. Would be interested to know if anyone making these for Bontrager hubs in the UK. Had your friend thought about selling the online? I think there was a company called Hauck cycles in the USA doing variants of these for other hubs. Bike looks sweet!


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Would be interested to know if anyone making these for Bontrager hubs in the UK. Had your friend thought about selling the online?


Not that I could find - I did email a few people, but no joy. I don't think the Hauck ones would fit.

I had thought about getting a few sets made. The friend that made them is a really nice guy, but he promises lots of things to lots of people, and ends up getting snowed under with work - I'm giving him a bit of cooling off time before I ask him how much of a PITA these were to make, and whether he'd consider making more (it's nothing like his main business).



> Bike looks sweet!


Cheers dude!


----------



## bberck (Sep 1, 2011)

Added a Bluto to the Farley today. Liked it rigid for a lot of riding but my bad shoulder took a beating on other rides.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

bberck said:


>


^ Neat! - is that a 9.6??

Why, oh why didn't Trek fit a 150x15 front wheel to the Farley 5 :nonod:


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

Misterg said:


> ^ Neat! - is that a 9.6??
> 
> Why, oh why didn't Trek fit a 150x15 front wheel to the Farley 5 :nonod:


cost!


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

bberck said:


> Added a Bluto to the Farley today. Liked it rigid for a lot of riding but my bad shoulder took a beating on other rides.


I'm curious as to what frame guard that is, and how did you route the rear derailer cable that exists the frame in that area????


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

jdaigneault said:


> I'm curious as to what frame guard that is, and how did you route the rear derailer cable that exists the frame in that area????


That is a custom Farley frame guard. Comes with all CF Farleys. I believe the guard has the cable port built in.


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

I want one!!!!!


----------



## bberck (Sep 1, 2011)

Already been answered but yes it came on the bike.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

bberck said:


> Added a Bluto to the Farley today. Liked it rigid for a lot of riding but my bad shoulder took a beating on other rides.


I ordered my Bluto last night for my 9.8. I can't wait!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Misterg said:


> ^ Neat! - is that a 9.6??
> 
> Why, oh why didn't Trek fit a 150x15 front wheel to the Farley 5 :nonod:


I keep wondering the same thing now. I love my F5 but this is my only main gripe with the bike. Anyway I am sure I will be running mine rigid for a long time to come. I was torn between the F5 and the On-One Fatty Trail which at the time was £1,200. It's now for sale at £999 and that's with a Bluto fork up front which is very good value. However, the main reason I bought a rigid fat bike was low maintenance. I just hose the thing down, dry and lube. It's nice not to have to worry about fork seals going, air pressure and oils/maintenance etc. Definitely by go-to bike for the impending Zombie Apocalypse ;-)


----------



## pipes10 (Mar 11, 2007)

So Haucks adaptors won't fit the stock F5 hub and I didn't have access to someone to make them for me like misterg did, so I relaced my wheel last night to a 150mm hub and added the Bluto. 

It sits at 31.88 lbs as shown in the pic. It was at 30.05 lbs with the stock fork and same build. 

F5 medium
Bluto 100mm
Stock rotors, tires, rims, cassette, saddle, chain, headset
Turbine dropper post
Next SL cranks and bar
Atlas stem
Half Nelson grips
X0 Trail brakes
X0 10sp shifter and mech
Point1 Podium pedals
Tires are setup tubeless


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

pipes10 said:


> So Haucks adaptors won't fit the stock F5 hub and I didn't have access to someone to make them for me like misterg did, so I relaced my wheel last night to a 150mm hub and added the Bluto.
> 
> It sits at 31.88 lbs as shown in the pic. It was at 30.05 lbs with the stock fork and same build.
> 
> ...


Nice job! I don't have much experience with wheel building so once you replaced the hub did you have to re-spoke the Mulefut or able to use existing spokes? Just wondering how much this could cost me. I am thinking of saving for a Lauf Carbonara rather than a Bluto. What size of rotor is that up front?

Edit: Ah wait you said stock rotors in your post...so same front & rear.


----------



## pipes10 (Mar 11, 2007)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Nice job! I don't have much experience with wheel building so once you replaced the hub did you have to re-spoke the Mulefut or able to use existing spokes? Just wondering how much this could cost me. I am thinking of saving for a Lauf Carbonara rather than a Bluto. What size of rotor is that up front?
> 
> Edit: Ah wait you said stock rotors in your post...so same front & rear.


I typically don't recommend using the same spokes but this bike won't be seeing the abuse my trail or DH bike does, so I was actually able to use the existing spokes. Spoke length on the 135mm hub is 265mm, on the 150mm hub you technically need 267mm spokes. I had plenty of spoke to work with.

Yes, stock 160mm rotor front and rear. No adaptor on the Bluto.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

pipes10 said:


> I typically don't recommend using the same spokes but this bike won't be seeing the abuse my trail or DH bike does, so I was actually able to use the existing spokes. Spoke length on the 135mm hub is 265mm, on the 150mm hub you technically need 267mm spokes. I had plenty of spoke to work with.
> 
> Yes, stock 160mm rotor front and rear. No adaptor on the Bluto.


Thanks. If I get round to it I can throw it to the guy I bought it from as they will do wheel builds. I've had the Stans Sealant and valve stems sitting there for months and have not got round to getting tubeless setup yet. Mine is still pretty much stock except for some ODI grips I stuck on it and Nukeproof Neutron pedals which are a good match for it.


----------



## pipes10 (Mar 11, 2007)

I haven't run tubes in 7 years. Setting it up tubeless was the very first thing I did.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

I ran stock tires/tubes for two months. Then studded D5's/tubes for almost four months. Put the Barbi's back on Friday and did the fattystripper tubeless. Lost over two pounds in the swap. I was running the D5's at about 10 psi for the road/ice riding on my commute. The Barbi's are currently at about 14. (higher than I kept in them last year for commuting) 

The bike feels like it's flying or I lost 100 pounds.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Oh, and Strava backs it up. I am faster.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Thanks. If I get round to it I can throw it to the guy I bought it from as they will do wheel builds. I've had the Stans Sealant and valve stems sitting there for months and have not got round to getting tubeless setup yet. Mine is still pretty much stock except for some ODI grips I stuck on it and Nukeproof Neutron pedals which are a good match for it.


First thing I did on my last two new bikes.

What park is that you are riding?

BTW, love the 3 Tides. Our favorite spot in Belfast.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

It's Bluto installation time!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> It's Bluto installation time!
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk












All done, only thing that had me worried was the cutting of the steerer tube, but it turned out good.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Looking good, dude!


----------



## burtjason (Oct 31, 2015)

Eagerly wait a ride report........ 😎


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Tomorrow morning, torn shirt at Brighton Rec. That is a good test! 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> Tomorrow morning, torn shirt at Brighton Rec. That is a good test!
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/QUOTE
> 
> ...


----------



## burtjason (Oct 31, 2015)

The Bluto definitely makes a difference on the rougher trails. That's why I bought the 9. I also got the 5 as a 2nd bike for my girlfriend to ride. Trouble is.....I started riding that one a lot......so much so, I ponied up for carbon bars and fork. I really like the 5 to ride on the smoother trails. Overall, I like my 9.....but it's close now.


----------



## elefantrider (Mar 14, 2016)

What month does Trek usually release new year models for sale? Usually about this time of the year the '17s come out?


----------



## burtjason (Oct 31, 2015)

I think around June


----------



## elefantrider (Mar 14, 2016)

Anyone here figure out how to put a Lefty fork on one?


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

likeaboss said:


> First thing I did on my last two new bikes.
> 
> What park is that you are riding?
> 
> BTW, love the 3 Tides. Our favorite spot in Belfast.


haha I think u got ur Belfasts mixed up
dude. This is the original Belfast in Northern Ireland. This is a coastal
route I do from Belfast to a village called Groomsport, just over 30mile
Return journey. 3 Tides sounds good....craft beer place. I googled it!


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> haha I think u got ur Belfasts mixed up
> dude. This is the original Belfast in Northern Ireland. This is a coastal
> route I do from Belfast to a village called Groomsport, just over 30mile
> Return journey. 3 Tides sounds good....craft beer place. I googled it!


LOL, photos look very much like our Maine coastline. Slainte!


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

LunchRider said:


> LunchRider said:
> 
> 
> > Tomorrow morning, torn shirt at Brighton Rec. That is a good test!
> ...


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

stopped by a LBS yesterday and got to see the Farley 7 and 9.6 in person.

20% discount on all fat bikes.

The 9.6 was a beautiful piece...but I am uncertain about the 27.5 x 3.8.

If it was 26 x 5 it would likely be my next bike.

I am planning to run 29x3 for the summer (and already have a wheelset for it).

I would have to buy another wheelset for winter use

EDIT: according to [TA] the new Barbegazi 4.5 will fit the current bike.

Hmmmm...decisions decisions.

Would like more tire options though for sure...ideally if I could get the 9.6 with 26 inch wheels I would buy it tomorrow.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

well, never thought i'd own a purple bike, but I do. 

I stopped by another LBS and they had a large Farley 7 on clearance. 

Grabbed it on the spot. 

Shop is setting it up tubeless for pickup tomorrow...and snow in the forecast so i hope to get a snowy ride in this long weekend.

Stoked!

As for the purple...I don't love it...but maybe it will grow on me...if not, I don't really care.

Planning to get a set of 29+ carbon hoops for summer use.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Put some miles on those stock Barbis first. After doing so I realized I don't need/want 29+...and I have the the wheels in hand. Up for sale now.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Gambit21 said:


> Put some miles on those stock Barbis first. After doing so I realized I don't need/want 29+...and I have the the wheels in hand. Up for sale now.


I plan to save them for the snow. I have a set of Bulldozers and FBN's for dry use in the interim.


----------



## elefantrider (Mar 14, 2016)

Gambit21 said:


> After doing so I realized I don't need/want 29+...and I have the the wheels in hand. Up for sale now.


What don't you like about the 29+ size? What size are you going with?


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

elefantrider said:


> What don't you like about the 29+ size? What size are you going with?


he's going with the Barbi's


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

well, got 2 rides in this long weekend on my Farley 7. 

Very, very happy with it. The bike fits me better than my prior Mayor and felt very familiar geometry wise (I previously had a Stache 8 and a Fuel EX9 before that). 

Instant acceleration, the Barbegazi's seemed decent. Conditions were icy on Friday and slushy on Saturday

Problems:

1. The shop set the tires up tubeless for me, when i asked them what method they used, they said Gorilla tape. I was hoping they had used the Sun or Stans tape which lasts longer and is easier to remove. I may re-do it soon. 

2. Would have liked to have a bigger front brake rotor. Easily fixed, i have an Avid 180 in my parts bin, just need to find the adapter for it. I ran out of brakes descending a ski hill. 

Questions:

1. Does the Farley with Mulefut rims come with the proper Sun tubeless rim strip? I'm wondering if i already have one under the Gorilla tape.

2. What adapters do i need to go to a 180 mm front rotor? Is it post or IS mount?


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

Swerny said:


> well, never thought i'd own a purple bike, but I do.
> 
> I stopped by another LBS and they had a large Farley 7 on clearance.
> 
> ...


You traitor. I almost did the same thing but it was too much work to get my carbon wheels to fit. 2016 Farley 7 for $ 2030.00


----------



## jcollinsia (Jul 26, 2011)

Bought my Farley 5 a few weeks ago but never got around to posting until now. Stock build with a few add-ons. Absolutely loving it so far!

Blackburn Outpost frame bag
Blackburn Outpost cages on the fork
Bontrager Mini Charger pump (mounted to fork)
PDW Mud Shovel front & rear mud guards
Fyxation Gates pedals
Race Face Strafe grips
Cheap Axiom top tube bag


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

@jcollinsia, can you tell me the size frame you have and the specifics on the Blackburn frame bag? Frame bag is on my list to purchase. 

Thanks.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

@jcollinsia, can you tell me the size frame you have and the specifics on the Blackburn frame bag? Frame bag is on my list to purchase. 

Thanks.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

RockyJo1 said:


> You traitor. I almost did the same thing but it was too much work to get my carbon wheels to fit. 2016 Farley 7 for $ 2030.00


lol, I thought about grabbing carbon wheels for my Mayor too. But i hesitated with the rear being 190 QR


----------



## jcollinsia (Jul 26, 2011)

@Jeff_G The Blackburn bag is a medium and it fits snug in the 19.5" Farley. I'm very happy with it so far and will be ordering the seat bag soon. The fact that the frame bag is expandable is a pretty nice feature.


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

Swerny said:


> lol, I thought about grabbing carbon wheels for my Mayor too. But i hesitated with the rear being 190 QR


That is why I wanted the the new frame. Just didn't want to buy a new freehub.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Swerny said:


> well, got 2 rides in this long weekend on my Farley 7.
> 
> Very, very happy with it. The bike fits me better than my prior Mayor and felt very familiar geometry wise (I previously had a Stache 8 and a Fuel EX9 before that).
> 
> ...


So what are your thoughts now on the 27.5x8" format? I rode mine all winter (with studs) and on the sand (beach) this fall with no problems.

J.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

JohnJ80 said:


> So what are your thoughts now on the 27.5x8" format? I rode mine all winter (with studs) and on the sand (beach) this fall with no problems.
> 
> J.


27.5 x 8 would be a damn impressive tire!

The Farley 7 has standard 26 x 4.7 tires


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

JohnJ80 said:


> So what are your thoughts now on the 27.5x8" format? I rode mine all winter (with studs) and on the sand (beach) this fall with no problems.
> 
> J.


27.5"x8" is the stated size. The actual tires measure (slightly) smaller....


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

paochow said:


> 27.5"x_8" <nope>_ is the stated size. The actual tires measure (slightly) smaller....


27.5 x *3.*8" on Farley 9+, (slightly smaller LOL) 
26 x 4.7" for Farley 5/7s


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

I know, I was being sarcastic since most tires don't measure their actual measurements.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Paochow said:


> 27.5"x8" is the stated size. The actual tires measure (slightly) smaller....





geop said:


> 27.5 x *3.*8" on Farley 9+, (slightly smaller LOL)
> 26 x 4.7" for Farley 5/7s





Paochow said:


> I know, I was being sarcastic since most tires don't measure their actual measurements.


Typo on my part - been doing that all day. I deserved (and appreciated) the sarcasm.

You're right about the Farley 7 tires - forgot that. I bought a version with the 3.8" tires after researching it quite heavily, talking to Trek and listening to a podcast/interview with the Trek engineering and product people. Found this tire size worked pretty well for where I ride and wondering what others found and if it was the same.

J.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

JohnJ80 said:


> Typo on my part - been doing that all day. I deserved (and appreciated) the sarcasm.
> 
> You're right about the Farley 7 tires - forgot that. I bought a version with the 3.8" tires after researching it quite heavily, talking to Trek and listening to a podcast/interview with the Trek engineering and product people. Found this tire size worked pretty well for where I ride and wondering what others found and if it was the same.
> 
> J.


Couldn't resist John, sorry boring Mondays. @Pao - caught your sacrasm. Just added onto it.

You have a source/link on the podcast/interview with Trek engineers. I am still on the fence between a Farley 7 or 9.6. Likely go with the 7 this week. Can't beat the price, love the ride.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Here's the podcast link. Lots of good information in this.

https://fat-bike.com/2015/10/fat-camp-podcast-7-ken-and-andy-talk-tech-with-trek-engineers/


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Anyone snap some pics of the 2017s frome the dealer log in?


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Getting some mulefut 50s built up in 27.5. Looking forward to trying out 27.5+ this summer on my 5


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## wgnzlz (Apr 3, 2016)

I picked up my first fat bike today, really my first mountain bike. It's a 2016 Trek Farley 7. I just took it for a quick spin and am loving it so far. I can't wait to hit some trails this spring/summer and am looking forward to some winter riding later this year too.


----------



## dEOS (May 25, 2009)

*9.6 on the coast*









Here is mine.
Modifications so far:
- Stealth Reverb dropper
- ESI chunky grips
- Eggbeaters

Seriously considering a Bluto and 29+ wheels.


----------



## Bird blaster (Apr 9, 2016)

Looking to get a Farley either this 2016 season or a 2017. I was thinking of getting a 9.8 frame to do a build but I wanted to see if anybody knew if there were any major changes ie) 27.5x5"?? If there was a new wheel size would it fit in the current 9.8?

Thanks!


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Bird blaster said:


> Looking to get a Farley either this 2016 season or a 2017. I was thinking of getting a 9.8 frame to do a build but I wanted to see if anybody knew if there were any major changes ie) 27.5x5"?? If there was a new wheel size would it fit in the current 9.8?
> 
> Thanks!


If there is a 27.5x5, I believe it would fit and would be designed to work with the stock rims.

J.


----------



## Bird blaster (Apr 9, 2016)

JohnJ80 said:


> If there is a 27.5x5, I believe it would fit and would be designed to work with the stock rims.
> 
> J.


Great thanks! Very helpful information. I don't have a Farley with a 27.5x3.8" or a 26x5" to look at to look at what the clearances are.

Leaning more towards picking up the frame now vs waiting to see what the 2017 brings.

Any chances there will be some pics/specs of the 17's coming out in the next 3-4 weeks?

Sorry if my questions are very rudimentary. This would be my first fat bike, and I am not really aware of the product cycles.

Regards
BB


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Bird blaster said:


> Great thanks! Very helpful information. I don't have a Farley with a 27.5x3.8" or a 26x5" to look at to look at what the clearances are.
> 
> Leaning more towards picking up the frame now vs waiting to see what the 2017 brings.
> 
> ...


Just to be clear, that's based on teaser pics that have been posted here and elsewhere of tester bikes from Bontrager. So it's "rumor" quality.

Most of my bikes have been built up from either stock or custom frames. That said, I bought a stock 9.8 because it pretty much came the way I wanted it. That's pretty unusual for me.

J.


----------



## Bird blaster (Apr 9, 2016)

I appreciate the info. Can't seem to find these threads for the 27.5x5....any links?


What would the diameter of this said tire be vs say a 29+ which also fits the Farley ?


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

You are going to need some a few hours, coffee, a pencil and some paper.



http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/27-5x4-whos-excited-whos-not-979984.html


----------



## Bird blaster (Apr 9, 2016)

Thanks - good read and good pics. Now I am pumped. Looks very very very promising for the 27.5x4.5" will sit nicely in a 9.8.


----------



## Alain2 (Jan 19, 2015)

I cracked the frame of my 2016 Trek Farley 9.8 during the winter. I never noticed when it happened, I just found out last weekend while cleaning the bike. The failure is behind the seat post, between the seat stays as you can see on the pic.

Then I was ready to bring the bike to my LBS for a warranty claim, I finished cleaning the bike and inspected it properly, making sure there were no other damages.

I found the rear wheel Wampa carbon also cracked. Again, I never noticed it before. Only the exterior construction of the wheel is cracked, the inside of the rim is fine. (The rim would still hold air if run tubeless.) I will take good pictures later.

I filled a warranty claim for the frame and the Wampa rim. My LBS is supporting me. Waiting to hear from Trek Canada.


----------



## tyrone.minton (Feb 15, 2010)

That is exactly where my 9.6 frame cracked, as well as under the top tube in front of the seat tube and further down the seat tube. My seat stays also cracked. I never heard the break, just noticed it while cleaning and catching a shard of carbon in the finger.

Trek replaced by 9.6 frame with a 9.8 and swapped all my components.

Good luck!


----------



## Alain2 (Jan 19, 2015)

The 9.8 is now silver and the 9.9 black and red.

I'm not sure how trek is going to deal with that, maybe a whole new 9.8 bike, or a new 9.9 frame that would match my fork and wheels.


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

SOC16: Trek Farley EX full suspension 27.5" fat bike crushes all seasons, hardtails get lighter - Bikerumor


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Alain2 said:


> The 9.8 is now silver and the 9.9 black and red.





aquamogal said:


> SOC16: Trek Farley EX full suspension 27.5" fat bike crushes all seasons, hardtails get lighter - Bikerumor


there are separate threads for the 2017 bikes guys, let's keep this thread for the 2016's.

http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/2017-trek-farley-ex-full-suspension-fat-bike-1009296.html

http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/2017-trek-farley-new-colours-1009299.html


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Swerny said:


> there are separate threads for the 2017 bikes guys, let's keep this thread for the 2016's.
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/2017-trek-farley-ex-full-suspension-fat-bike-1009296.html
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/2017-trek-farley-new-colours-1009299.html


What if somebody asks "Which bikes do you like better, the '16 or the '17"? Then will you allow us to talk about them here? Pretty please?


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Alain2 said:


> The 9.8 is now silver and the 9.9 black and red.
> 
> I'm not sure how trek is going to deal with that, maybe a whole new 9.8 bike, or a new 9.9 frame that would match my fork and wheels.


If its like my trek warranty claims you wont hear anything, they ship the longest cheapest way they can. Basically the lbs will get a tracking number that something is being sent to them is the first sign you get... Maybe a frame and wheel will be delt with differently


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

litespeedaddict said:


> What if somebody asks "Which bikes do you like better, the '16 or the '17"? Then will you allow us to talk about them here? Pretty please?


do what you want (obviously), i was just making a suggestion.

Seeing how there's a separate 2015 thread, I'm suggesting we do the same for 2017.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

geop said:


> Couldn't resist John, sorry boring Mondays. @Pao - caught your sacrasm. Just added onto it.
> 
> You have a source/link on the podcast/interview with Trek engineers. I am still on the fence between a Farley 7 or 9.6. Likely go with the 7 this week. Can't beat the price, love the ride.


Looks like the 27.5x4.5" is real. See this article.

An excerpt:



> The new Farley 9.9 is a 22 pound, North America-only build that gets custom 27.5 HED Big Half Deal wheels.
> 
> 2017-Trek-Farley-99-carbon-ultralight-hardtail-fat-bike02
> 
> The wheels use 495g carbon rims laced to HED's carbon hubs and comes in at just 1,877g for the set. Those combine with all-new Bontrager Barbegazi 27.5 x 4.5 tires that, on average, come in a little lighter than the 26 x 4.7 version (1240g versus 1305g, to be exact). The result is dramatically larger contact patch and better side knob-to-dirt engagement on the 27.5 tire that's also lighter.


This will be my winter tire with the addition of studs.

J.


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

Tunalic said:


> Took a little test ride at my LBS on a 9.6... I really didn't need to do this!:crazy:





hoboscratch said:


> Buy it.


I couldn't resist, 2k out the door!










The Fatty is for sale now!


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

Does Trek sell the aluminum frame I've only seen the carbon listed?


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Maiden 14km ride on the Farley 7 yesterday. Loving it. On single track ran 8/8.5 psi. A little trucky in granny gear but nothing serious. Will try dropping to 7/7.5 today.









Stealth dropper install was clean - well worth it. Fatty stripper tubeless this week and some wider bars.

Only issue is the reach adjust screw on the DB3 brakes - Stupid big. I can't fit my dropper lever close enough to reach without readjusting hand. *Anyone try replacing with a shorter bolt?*


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

RockyJo1 said:


> Does Trek sell the aluminum frame I've only seen the carbon listed?


Check with your LBS, I think this has been previously discussed and although only the carbon one was listed on the website the bike shop could order an aluminium frame.

John


----------



## fatboy43 (May 4, 2008)

^^ I ordered the 5. It is the 5 in terms of its color only as it is the same frame as every aluminum frame in the line up. I would imagine every shop should be able to order the same.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

geop said:


> Fatty stripper tubeless this week and some wider bars.


Just use the Sun tape...i have the same bike and just picked up the tape from Amazon for like $23 and it's plug and play for the Mulefut rims which are tubeless ready


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

Swerny said:


> Just use the Sun tape...i have the same bike and just picked up the tape from Amazon for like $23 and it's plug and play for the Mulefut rims with are TR


Agree, the sun tape was bulletproof!


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

geop said:


> Only issue is the reach adjust screw on the DB3 brakes - Stupid big. I can't fit my dropper lever close enough to reach without readjusting hand. *Anyone try replacing with a shorter bolt?*


Stupid design and that bolt also rusts. I bought my 9.6 in February and those bolts are covered in rust now. The DB3s seem decent but mine squeak like hell when wet. I will sand the pads, rotors and re-bed to see if that helps.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

has anyone gone to to a 180 mm front rotor on their Farley's yet? I'm wondering which adapter i need to do so. Is it post mount or IS?


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

Swerny said:


> has anyone gone to to a 180 mm front rotor on their Farley's yet? I'm wondering which adapter i need to do so. Is it post mount or IS?


farley 7 would be post mount, same as bluto

you want the sram 20S mount, I installed one a few weeks back, super easy

https://www.google.com/search?q=sram+20s+mount&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=sram+20s+mount&tbm=shop


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

TitanofChaos said:


> farley 7 would be post mount, same as bluto
> 
> you want the sram 20S mount, I installed one a few weeks back, super easy
> 
> https://www.google.com/search?q=sram+20s+mount&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#q=sram+20s+mount&tbm=shop


Thanks!

EDIT:

I know my brakes are SRAM, but could i use this as well?

http://www.amazon.com/Shimano-Brake...&sr=8-1&keywords=post+mount+brake+adapter#Ask

A lot cheaper and looks neater


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Swerny said:


> Just use the Sun tape...i have the same bike and just picked up the tape from Amazon for like $23 and it's plug and play for the Mulefut rims with are TR


$25 for 2 sets of Fatty Strippers. Far superior then tape and you only need 3oz of sealant per tire. Best method out there for fatties IMHO. Fatty Stripper

I will post pics when I install


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

geop said:


> $25 for 2 sets of Fatty Strippers. Far superior then tape and you only need 3oz of sealant per tire. Best method out there for fatties IMHO. Fatty Stripper
> 
> I will post pics when I install


I don't see how FattyStripper is "far superior" when i got 10 metres of Sun tape for less than the strippers which are pretty much single use.

If you want cost savings, then use Bumpyride's saran wrap method.

I don't see the point of fabricating something when the Mulefut's have a ready made option but to each their own.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

I couldn't find an inexpensive supplier for Sunringle fatty tape in Canada. Amazon.com does not ship to Canada, and amazon.ca does not sell it. Trust me - I tried to checkout. Chainreaction.com has an option for $118CDN. No thanks. I found and researched FattyStripper. Great, inexpensive option and holds for a long time with minimal sealant. Works for me.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

geop said:


> I couldn't find an inexpensive supplier for Sunringle fatty tape in Canada. Amazon.com does not ship to Canada, and amazon.ca does not sell it. Trust me - I tried to checkout. Chainreaction.com has an option for $118CDN. No thanks. I found and researched FattyStripper. Great, inexpensive option and holds for a long time with minimal sealant. Works for me.


It's $25 + $9 shipping from Universal Cycles

https://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=78913

I bought mine from Amazon.com while on vacation in the US


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Fatty Strippers went on great. No leaks after 1 ride. Using 2oz of sealant per tire.









I was in a rush to get a ride in before dark and planned on cutting the excess off at the trailhead. I forgot my box cutters.









I love the tubeless tires. They seem more lively - can't explain it - but I like it. I was running from 4-8psi but need to experiment more in the next few days. *What are others running for psi tubeless on singletrack?*


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

I run 6.5 front and 7.5 rear on the barbagazis tubeless. I weigh 180lb loaded up.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

I'm apparently the exception to the rule and an example of why there is no right answer to the psi question. 

I run about 13 in the rear and 10 in the front. Sometimes a little higher. 

I like to go fast but don't like to pedal hard. Kinda lazy really so single digit PSI on anything but snow makes me sad.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

I've been running the 27.5x3.8 on snow and sand this winter. I had studded the 3.8's. That worked pretty well for me at about 7psi. 

I'm going to un-stud the 3.8's for summer usage and then give the new 4.5's a try for next winter and will probably stud them. I think that would be a perfect combination. I had good luck with the 3.8's on both sand and snow last year though - don't want to give the impression that the 3.8's weren't a good tire in those conditions because they were.

J.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

JohnJ80 said:


> I've been running the 27.5x3.8 on snow and sand this winter. I had studded the 3.8's. That worked pretty well for me at about 7psi.
> 
> I'm going to un-stud the 3.8's for summer usage and then give the new 4.5's a try for next winter and will probably stud them. I think that would be a perfect combination. I had good luck with the 3.8's on both sand and snow last year though - don't want to give the impression that the 3.8's weren't a good tire in those conditions because they were.
> 
> J.


Can you detail how your studded the 3.8s?


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

likeaboss said:


> Can you detail how your studded the 3.8s?


I had the LBS do it just because I was traveling at the time.

But what they used were GripStuds in a patter with two lines down, one on each side of the tire, down the outer knobs. Worked really well. Never felt at all insecure in riding it even on glare ice.

Grip Studs screw into a knob with a tool that you get from Grip Studs. You can wind them out the same way.

J.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> I'm apparently the exception to the rule and an example of why there is no right answer to the psi question.
> 
> I run about 13 in the rear and 10 in the front. Sometimes a little higher.
> 
> I like to go fast but don't like to pedal hard. Kinda lazy really so single digit PSI on anything but snow makes me sad.


You are on pavement with that psi, right? That does sound fast. Terrain is the deciding factor on psi.

On an offroad dirt trail you would be bouncing off every root and rock at that psi. I was barreling down the mountain today at 40km/h with 6.5 / 8 psi. Perfect for singletrack with roots and loose rocks. And I am a very heavy rider.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

jdaigneault said:


> I run 6.5 front and 7.5 rear on the barbagazis tubeless. I weigh 180lb loaded up.


Thanks for your psi. Worked great. I settled on 6.5 / 8 barbz tubeless and I am A LOT heavier then you. Ha.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Not on pavement. My go to single track is not as rooted up as that picture. Definitely some roots and rocks but the downhills where you pick up speed are a pretty clean. I don't bounce around at that PSI.


----------



## Alain2 (Jan 19, 2015)

Here are pictures of my cracked Wampa Carbon 27.5 rear wheel.


----------



## fatboy43 (May 4, 2008)

Sooo...after riding my friends Farley last year I was surprised at how nimble his bike felt as opposed to my Fatboy. Obviously I vowed to never ride his bike again, but I could never get it out of my mind. I loved my Fatboy but I had Farley creeping into those dark recesses of my mind where needlessly expensive decisions are made.

Nonetheless I remained stalwart and kept pedaling away.... month after month after month. But then Trek came out with a frame with sliding dropouts....well that really got my attention. And just when I was getting ready to build a summer wheelset Trek slapped me in the face with the 27.5 x 3.8 Hodag. To top it all off, Nextie came out of left field with a 650B x 65 rim, in my opinion the perfect wheel for the new Hodag.

I could no longer hold out. I crumbled like an old man being sucker punched in the gut and the check book came whizzing out. The rims were ordered, the new I9 torches and ancillary wheel bits were ordered and finally the frame was ordered; with the expectation that I would transfer all my existing parts to the Farley to save money.

That expectation could, of course, never be met, but it made me feel frugal. That frugal dream slowly unraveled and eventually collapsed as the build proceeded. I needed a new seat post because spesh & Trek do not use the same diameters. While I'm at it....how about a new saddle. And of course the old Bennie pedals simply wouldn't do so Canfield Crampons got ordered. And wouldn't you know it but my BB was shot and the E13 cranks weren't compatible with the Farley, so Race Face Cinch Turbines and a new BB got ordered. And last but not least a new Sugar Skull stem cap because....I'm not sure why, it just is.

29lbs of fat awesomeness. She was just completed tonight. First ride at 0630 tomorrow. Very excited.










Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

I was thinking of those same rims, how much do they weigh? Right now i have jackelope 27.5 x 80's and was thinking of selling them and doing Nextie/DT Swiss wheels. Like the orange nips!!


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

I searched and can't find an answer yet. Help.

Farley 7

I noticed my rear wheel is not aligned. I need to adjust the axle and when I do it I would like to try slamming it as far forward as possible. 

Can I ran the stock length chain? How do I know if my chain is too long? 

Thanks All


----------



## fatboy43 (May 4, 2008)

Not sure how much the Nextie 65's weight. Sorry. The wider rims might be nice to keep for a winter wheel set. As 27.5 tires becomes more widespread there should be some good snow tires that would work great on the 80's leaving the 65's for 3.8 or even 3" rubber for the summer. 

I had to have a link removed from the chain when I put the axle in its forward position. I have a Sram X0 rear derailleur. Not sure if it would work without link removal on other setups. 

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

fatboy I am loving that bike, nice job. Looks beautiful. Trek is just killing it right now.


----------



## fatboy43 (May 4, 2008)

^^^ thank you! Just finished the first ride. Fast and nimble. Corners and accelerates great. Everything I hoped for. I will however need to get used to the lower momentum of the lighter rims and tires. 5" tires at speed crush most obstacles in their path. 

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Andy81 (Jan 25, 2016)

Jeff_G said:


> I searched and can't find an answer yet. Help.
> 
> Farley 7
> 
> ...


Adjust the dropouts to the forward position, put it in the lowest gear (smallest cog), look at the derailer; does it curl up too far and hit (or almost hit) the cassette? If so, the chain too long and you can remove link(s)


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Andy81 said:


> Adjust the dropouts to the forward position, put it in the lowest gear (smallest cog), look at the derailer; does it curl up too far and hit (or almost hit) the cassette? If so, the chain too long and you can remove link(s)


Excellent. Thanks.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> Excellent. Thanks.


You can adjust the b tension screw and avoid having to remove a link.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Went to a bike maintenance class where you work on you own bike. My bike ended being used as the "bad example" when assessing drive train wear. 

My chain is stretched way beyond specs. Need a chain and a cassette. I've got about 2,500 miles on the bike. Ridden every day in the winter. Chain wiped down daily and oiled at least twice a week. 

My thought at this point is replacing with a stock cassette and a good chain. 

Any thoughts on the components I should buy?


----------



## Gigantic (Aug 31, 2012)

Jeff_G said:


> Went to a bike maintenance class where you work on you own bike. My bike ended being used as the "bad example" when assessing drive train wear.
> 
> My chain is stretched way beyond specs. Need a chain and a cassette. I've got about 2,500 miles on the bike. Ridden every day in the winter. Chain wiped down daily and oiled at least twice a week.
> 
> ...


Duuuuuuude... i replace my chain about every 650 miles. it's slightly extreme, but I get close to 2200 miles out of the rest of the components. Granted, I'm a superclyde and am really hard on my drivetrain, but 2500 on a single chain is silly. ;-)

I'm partial to SRAM X9 or better chains and Shimano XT or better cassettes.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Gigantic said:


> Duuuuuuude... i replace my chain about every 650 miles. it's slightly extreme, but I get close to 2200 miles out of the rest of the components. Granted, I'm a superclyde and am really hard on my drivetrain, but 2500 on a single chain is silly. ;-)
> 
> I'm partial to SRAM X9 or better chains and Shimano XT or better cassettes.


Well then I'm glad spent the money on the class.

If I bought a chain every 650 miles I would have been on fourth chain! The guy said the number one tool, by far, that you cannot be wihout is the a chain stretch measuring thingy.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> Well then I'm glad spent the money on the class.
> 
> If I bought a chain every 650 miles I would have been on fourth chain! The guy said the number one tool, by far, that you cannot be without is the a chain stretch measuring thingy.


I learned the hard way too. It is a lot cheaper buying 4 new chains for $20 vs a cassette for $150 plus front chainring for $50. Buy a chain wear tool (park CC-3.2) and remove the guesswork.

The F7 is delivered with:
Cassette: SRAM XG-1150, 10-42, 11 speed
Chain: SRAM PC 1130

Where do you buy a 28T Raceface narrow-wide chainring? I can only find 30T


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Jeff_G said:


> The guy said the number one tool, by far, that you cannot be wihout is the a chain stretch measuring thingy.


May be so, but you can do equally well (or better) with a 12" steel rule: Hold the '0' of the rule against the front edge of a chain rivet. If the chain is new , then the 12" mark will also be at the front edge of a rivet. Part worn is the centre of the rivet, and "replace now" is the back edge of the rivet.

Some interesting reading here: Chain Maintenance


----------



## slowride454 (Jan 11, 2014)

geop said:


> I learned the hard way too. It is a lot cheaper buying 4 new chains for $20 vs a cassette for $150 plus front chainring for $50. Buy a chain wear tool (park CC-3.2) and remove the guesswork.
> 
> The F7 is delivered with:
> Cassette: SRAM XG-1150, 10-42, 11 speed
> ...


I got my blue 26T Race face NW ring from Jenson USA.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Misterg said:


> May be so, but you can do equally well (or better) with a 12" steel rule: Hold the '0' of the rule against the front edge of a chain rivet. If the chain is new , then the 12" mark will also be at the front edge of a rivet. Part worn is the centre of the rivet, and "replace now" is the back edge of the rivet.
> 
> Some interesting reading here: Chain Maintenance


totally agree. I use this method in combo with loggin miles/km in my Strava to detect when a chain is due a replacement. Depending on how you look after a chain and the type of riding you do will impact when you need to bin it. I'm speaking as someone who has absolutely destroyed several drivetrains on a daily commute through lack of maintenance and overlubing chains. IF you look after a chain (and drivetrain) you can get huge mileage from them. Use the ruler method quite a bit. It can easily save you having to fork out for new crankset,cassette AND chain.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

This looks like the 28T to me.

Race Face Narrow Wide Direct Mount Chain Ring 26T-30T

How drastic would it be going to a 30T? I don't need the granny in the summer and run out of gear sometimes. Winter I would surely want the 28T.


----------



## Thrawn (Jan 15, 2009)

Alain2 said:


> Here are pictures of my cracked Wampa Carbon 27.5 rear wheel.


Oh my... Please keep us posted...


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Jeff_G said:


> This looks like the 28T to me.
> 
> Race Face Narrow Wide Direct Mount Chain Ring 26T-30T
> 
> How drastic would it be going to a 30T? I don't need the granny in the summer and run out of gear sometimes. Winter I would surely want the 28T.


I have 32T and so far so good. I live in MN tho, lots of quick bursty hills. It's a fairly new chainring too so I have to do some more testing. I'm about 180 and don't have what I'd consider super strong legs.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Oh, I also just put 27.5+ mulefuts with Trailblazers on my rigid 5. Definitely getting some more pedal strikes but so far I'm loving it. If strikes become more of an issue I'll have to make a decision on whether to get a proper 27.5+ bike or try out 29+. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

Just put the Barbs on!


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

Tunalic said:


> Just put the Barbs on!


Do you have a pic of the Hodags next to theBarbegazis?


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

Fuzzwardo said:


> Do you have a pic of the Hodags next to theBarbegazis?


No. The plan was to do that. I reckon I'm gonna have to start writing down a check off list!


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> I'm apparently the exception to the rule and an example of why there is no right answer to the psi question.
> 
> I run about 13 in the rear and 10 in the front. Sometimes a little higher.
> 
> I like to go fast but don't like to pedal hard. Kinda lazy really so single digit PSI on anything but snow makes me sad.


I put a bluto on mine for the summer and run 15 front and rear.

Nice and fast!


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Tunalic said:


> Just put the Barbs on!


Are those mounted up on your factory wheels?
Looks very nice!


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

LunchRider said:


> Are those mounted up on your factory wheels?
> Looks very nice!


Yes, that's the Jackalopes.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> I put a bluto on mine for the summer and run 15 front and rear.
> 
> Nice and fast!


I started on about 15 with the Barbs & soon found out it was too much. Dropped to 12 & again too high. Then started to run 10 rear & 8 front for hardpack/trail centres. Have started to dip a bit lower eg 7 R & 5 F for beach riding. Did about 46km on my F5 last week...mix of road, towpath, natural boggy & rooty trails. 10/8 seems like a good compromise as lower on road can be a bit of a drag. I'm about 85kg but gonna try lower once I get these set up tubeless.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I'm thinking about going to a 32T chainring on my 9.8. Is it noticeable? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

New shoe day!! 
Just installed the Barbegazi's on my 9.8 should get them out tonight and a good long test ride tomorrow.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> New shoe day!!
> Just installed the Barbegazi's on my 9.8 should get them out tonight and a good long test ride tomorrow.


Definitely want a report. Depending on what you have to say, I might bring my plan of putting them on for winter off of the back burner.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I'm trying to figure out if I can use my summer fork (bluto) with the Barb's. Can you take a measurement between the lip of the Wampa and the top of the tire? Much appreciated! Looks good!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Here is a couple photos on a bluto. I tested it on my friends just fits no rubbing. 

















And a pic from the sloppy ride this morning


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Perfect! Thanks a bunch!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

LunchRider said:


> I'm trying to figure out if I can use my summer fork (bluto) with the Barb's.


They fit in the Bluto no problem on 80mm rims:










There's about a finger's width of clearance under the fork crown. They come closest to the forks by the stanchion seal on either side - can't get a finger in there, but still OK clearance (maybe 1/4"??). This might be the limiting factor if you had wider rims.

HTH.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> Here is a couple photos on a bluto. I tested it on my friends just fits no rubbing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


How is the rolling resistance as compared to the 3.8?


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Well between yesterday and today I got 70 miles in on them and they roll great. I think they may roll a little better but still a little early to tell!!


----------



## benjyboard (Mar 31, 2004)

*Farley 9.8 29 plus conversion*

Finally got my 29+ plus carbon rims built onto my Onyx hubs.
My LBS Cooksons Cycles (Whitefield Manchester) built the wheels and paid great attention to detail.
I loved how the bike rode with the stock wheels but the decrease in weight and less rolling resistance makes the 9.8 fly.

The Onyx instant engagement and silent free hub really adds to the ride experience.

The Rims are from Light Bicycle and took the Bonty Chupacabra tyres well.

I nearly forgot to mention the E thirteen 9-44 cassette, this shifts much better than the SRAM did (particularly with xt rear mech).

Got some of my fastest Strava times to date, so I'm happy.

Bike weighs just over 21 pound, lightest MTB I've owned









Here's the wheels against my LR Discovery


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

benjyboard said:


> Finally got my 29+ plus carbon rims built onto my Onyx hubs.
> My LBS Cooksons Cycles (Whitefield Manchester) built the wheels and paid great attention to detail.
> I loved how the bike rode with the stock wheels but the decrease in weight and less rolling resistance makes the 9.8 fly.
> 
> ...


Tubeless?


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> Definitely want a report. Depending on what you have to say, I might bring my plan of putting them on for winter off of the back burner.


Or you can listen to what we've been saying about them all along.
Running 4.7's and they're fantastic everywhere.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

benjyboard said:


> Got some of my fastest Strava times to date, so I'm happy.


I have a set of 29+ Chupies, DT Swiss rims waiting to be built up.
I'm loving the stock Barbis in all conditions so much though that I'm in no rush. 
I'm neither a Strava Dork nor a weight weenie, so my motivation to build them up is lacking.

Bontrager hit a home run with the Barbegazi.
Still looking forward to riding the Chupies at some point though.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Gambit21 said:


> Or you can listen to what we've been saying about them all along.
> Running 4.7's and they're fantastic everywhere.


Sorry, but the size I am asking about is the 27.5x4.5. They just came out and this is the first I have read about real experiences of this size. Ok, not really sorry.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> Sorry, but the size I am asking about is the 27.5x4.5. They just came out and this is the first I have read about real experiences of this size. Ok, not really sorry.


I really don't know or care what you have to be sorry or not sorry about.
That said the 27.5 version should be every bit as good in summer conditions.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Ok great. Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

You're going to LOVE that tire.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I'm going to order them up soon!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

On order! Not sure if I will put them on before or after the Zoo-De-Mac this weekend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Finally got around to converting mine to tubeless a few days ago - no muss no fuss.
Were great before, even better now.

The only place they give up the ghost a bit is in deep, wet mud. The kind of stuff you'd want Bud's for. Aside from that, they're a great 4 season tire.
I can't speak about snow - haven't tried that yet and even more unsure how the 27.5's would do there. Snow is no variable anyway so it ends up being very subjective.


----------



## FatBike&SlenderWoman (Apr 1, 2016)

Are there any tires other than the Hodag that are large enough to run on a 584 x 75 Jackalope rim?


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Anybody tried one of these yet?








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> Anybody tried one of these yet?
> View attachment 1070684
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes sir have had one for about three month that along with the e thirteen 9-44 is great.


----------



## G-Choro (Jul 30, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> Anybody tried one of these yet?
> View attachment 1070684
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I have one on my Jet9 RDO. I like it. No problems.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> Anybody tried one of these yet?
> View attachment 1070684
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I was looking at getting one. Only concern is Wolf has 49mm chainline vs 51mm from Raceface. With it flipped backwards how does it work with 1x11? I was planning on getting the Absolute Black oval with 51mm chainline. Give a review and check chainline once you have it installed.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Wolf tooth makes a reverse dish for the race face.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

It looks to be a good fit and went through all gears nicely while on the stand. However, I can see the potential for swapping the cassette and chain at the same time.








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Well I have my Barbegazis but will wait till after this weekend to put them on.
I am doing the zoo de Mac this weekend (51 miles of paved road).










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> Well I have my Barbegazis but will wait till after this weekend to put them on.
> I am doing the zoo de Mac this weekend (51 miles of paved road).
> 
> 
> ...


Great tires, i put over 100 miles on mine last weekend and must say i really like this tire!!

have fun on Zoo de mac


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Anyone know if the 9.8 is available to be purchased as a frame only?

Edit: I see it on the website as frame only.


----------



## G-Choro (Jul 30, 2010)

Where did you pick these up? Lbs? I haven't seen them listed on Trek's website. 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I had the LBS order them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## G-Choro (Jul 30, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> I had the LBS order them.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks!

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I just looked on the Trek website and you can order them online.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## kevin476 (Mar 18, 2013)

Just got a good deal from LBS on a Farley 5. They said the 2017 bill be baby blue so I took the deal on the 2016


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Just purchased the 9.8 frame only from LBS with press fit bottom bracket. Anyone know if my existing race face turbine cinch crank for 190 rear with 30mm spindle will work in the frame and bb?

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> Great tires, i put over 100 miles on mine last weekend and must say i really like this tire!!
> 
> have fun on Zoo de mac


Damn, I had to move my stranglehold out.
Did you have to do that?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> Damn, I had to move my stranglehold out.
> Did you have to do that?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Nope mine is still slammed all the way forward!! rear tire at 10PSI!! plenty of room


----------



## paulphilly (May 22, 2016)

Just picked up a new '16 Farley 9 today and am super stoked. I added Shimano MX80 pedals, volt green bottle holder, topeak pouch, and rear red blinking night light. I still have to remove the reflectors, and maybe switch out the handles. Man do I love this bike.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

geop said:


> I learned the hard way too. It is a lot cheaper buying 4 new chains for $20 vs a cassette for $150 plus front chainring for $50. Buy a chain wear tool (park CC-3.2) and remove the guesswork.
> 
> The F7 is delivered with:
> Cassette: SRAM XG-1150, 10-42, 11 speed
> ...


I was cleaning my drivetrain even though I know it's worn out and noticed a chunk missing out of one ring on the cassette. Replacing parts on June 5th when I attend a bike maintenance class. Hope it holds up for a few more rides as long as I steer clear of that gear.

I ordered the parts above and this in blue 30t: Race Face Narrow Wide Direct Mount Chain Ring 26T-30T

I think I'm going to be able to spin the larger chain ring in the summer. 
Hopefully all the part numbers are correct.....


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> Nope mine is still slammed all the way forward!! rear tire at 10PSI!! plenty of room


My PSI is high right now since I just mounted/seated them.
I will check into that when I get a chance.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> My PSI is high right now since I just mounted/seated them.
> I will check into that when I get a chance.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk












10 PSI.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Here's mine


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> Here's mine


Yes, that is about what I have. I put it back.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

My front tire is rubbing the bluto. Time to put the carbon back on. It spun just fine when I first put it on, but a few hours later, it started to rub.

This might be my winter set up. It all depends on my first ride with the new Barbs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> My front tire is rubbing the bluto. Time to put the carbon back on. It spun just fine when I first put it on, but a few hours later, it started to rub.
> 
> This might be my winter set up. It all depends on my first ride with the new Barbs.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That is a pisser that it ended up hitting the fork. Mine is rigid and I don't mind it at all.

T


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

What is your PSI up front?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

I'm at 9 psi front I am a larger rider so I tend to have more psi than others.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Thanks for posting your experience with the Bluto and 27.5X4.5 tire. I know lots of people are going to be wondering what fits what, and that helps. I still find it nearly impossible to believe that is the only fork from a major manufacturer that we have. Weird.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

LunchRider said:


> What is your PSI up front?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


7psi winter, 9psi summer. I'm not a little guy either. I also don't like messing with tire pressure all the time so these seem to work well for me.

I ride primarily on a beach spring through fall and then trails in the winter.

J.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Re-carbinating my front end.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I like the new meats! My Strava time was the same, it might have been faster if I didn't happen across a group of riders that I needed to pass. I don't mind putting the carbon fork back on, since all I seem to do is add weight to my bike with "stuff".
However, I will be moving my chain stay back a touch. There was an unmistakable pop when gravel would get caught in the tread and contact the frame.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

LunchRider said:


> However, I will be moving my chain stay back a touch. There was an unmistakable pop when gravel would get caught in the tread and contact the frame.


Ouch- I know that sound and it can get pretty expensive sounding.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Anyone know which bottom bracket is the correct one for the 9.8 carbon frame? I can't seem to find it on the site. 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

I stand corrected.


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Negotiator50 said:


> Anyone know which bottom bracket is the correct one for the 9.8 carbon frame? I can't seem to find it on the site.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


The stock 9.8 BB is the Race Face BB92 part number BB4112430B15.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

JackP42 said:


> The stock 9.8 BB is the Race Face BB92 part number BB4112430B15.


Thanks. Exactly what I needed.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

JackP42 said:


> The stock 9.8 BB is the Race Face BB92 part number BB4112430B15.


i just replaced my BB with one from wheels MFG

BB86 to 30MM Flanged, Dual Row PressFit 86/92 Ceramic Bottom Bracket


----------



## attomixt (Dec 26, 2004)

I have a Farley 7 with the Race Face Affect crank. I wanted to take it off, pull the BB bearing seal, and give them some grease so they last longer. I didn't mess around too much, but the 8mm hex on the crank didn't break loose by hand. What is the torque on this? I gather an extractor is needed as well.


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

I hesitated too long on the 7. Got offered a really good deal on a 5 or a blizzard 30. Now I'm pondering the difference.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

RockyJo1 said:


> I hesitated too long on the 7. Got offered a really good deal on a 5 or a blizzard 30. Now I'm pondering the difference.


Buddy has a Blizzard. Nice bike but much heavier then my Farley 7 and badly needs upgrades. His brakes don't cut it in the mountains, handlebars are too narrow at 700mm. 1x10 is OK but much harder to climb with. Tires are super grippy and great for snow/mud but very slow rollers vs my Farley 7's Barbis. Also, Blizzards have serious issues with the rear hub. Expect multiple warranties on it.

I can't get over how good the Farley 7 is. I ride it 90% of the time now and I have a very nice Trail bike collecting dust.


----------



## glockrocket17 (Aug 26, 2015)

I love my farley 7. Just got some Renthal carbon bars for it. It is such a fun bike to ride. I would like to get a set of 29+ carbon rims and tires for it next.


----------



## Haste11 (Jul 5, 2014)

attomixt said:


> I have a Farley 7 with the Race Face Affect crank. I wanted to take it off, pull the BB bearing seal, and give them some grease so they last longer. I didn't mess around too much, but the 8mm hex on the crank didn't break loose by hand. What is the torque on this? I gather an extractor is needed as well.


Torque spec is 45 ft lbs(61nm), I prefer the Pedro's crank puller.. It's my go to at the shop I wrench at and I own it for my personal tool set.
http://www.amazon.com/Pedros-Universal-Bicycle-Remover-Handle/dp/B000IZGF92

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## paulphilly (May 22, 2016)

My new Farley 9


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

paulphilly said:


> My new Farley 9


Saweeeeet!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## paulphilly (May 22, 2016)

LunchRider said:


> Saweeeeet!
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks, I love it. I added Shimano MX80 pedals, 700RT Bontrager light and rear pouch, specialized speedometer (does that make me cheezy??), tubeless, ESI grips.


----------



## attomixt (Dec 26, 2004)

Haste11 said:


> Torque spec is 45 ft lbs(61nm), I prefer the Pedro's crank puller.. It's my go to at the shop I wrench at and I own it for my personal tool set.
> http://www.amazon.com/Pedros-Universal-Bicycle-Remover-Handle/dp/B000IZGF92
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks! This is not reversed thread correct?


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

paulphilly said:


> Thanks, I love it. I added Shimano MX80 pedals, 700RT Bontrager light and rear pouch, specialized speedometer (does that make me cheezy??), tubeless, ESI grips.


I LOVE my 700 light. It's one of the few things I did not research for 6 months before purchasing.

Might be better, cheaper etc lights out there I don't care. I LOVE it.


----------



## Haste11 (Jul 5, 2014)

attomixt said:


> Thanks! This is not reversed thread correct?


Correct

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> I LOVE my 700 light. It's one of the few things I did not research for 6 months before purchasing.
> 
> Might be better, cheaper etc lights out there I don't care. I LOVE it.


I have the same light. Super bright!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Can someone please explain how to operate these sliding dropouts on the 9.8? Should I be removing those black T shaped tabs that are sitting in the dropouts?

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Negotiator50 said:


> Can someone please explain how to operate these sliding dropouts on the 9.8? Should I be removing those black T shaped tabs that are sitting in the dropouts?
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


Yes the plastic must be removed to move them forward.


----------



## MObiker (Feb 14, 2004)

I would like to get a KS LEV dropper post for my farley 9. Any comments on which post to get? I think I would like the 125mm travel.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I have the Rock Shox Reverb Stealth. It works well. I don't recall what the range of travel is off hand. The weakness is the remote. I have inadvertently applied pressure when loading it in my wife's minivan, which caused it to leak a little. I had to bleed it and all was well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

What do you guys think I could sell the 9.8 carbon fork for? It's never been used and I built the frame up with a Bluto. Just trying to see if it's worth keeping or selling. 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Negotiator50 said:


> What do you guys think I could sell the 9.8 carbon fork for? It's never been used and I built the frame up with a Bluto. Just trying to see if it's worth keeping or selling.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


Keep it if you built it with 27.5" wheels. It will come in handy if you want to run the 4.5" Barbegazis.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

MObiker said:


> I would like to get a KS LEV dropper post for my farley 9. Any comments on which post to get? I think I would like the 125mm travel.


I run a 150mm Giant SL dropper with a $9 shim to fit 31.6mm on the Farley. Bomb proof, easy to service and a lot cheaper then a Reverb. The Reverb's are great but too much $ and not great to service/bleed IMO.

Bontrager/Trek just released a new dropper too. Similar price to Giant.

Here is a great review comparing all droppers:
The best mountain bike dropper posts - MBR


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Finally got my 29+ setup done. 

XM Carbonspeed 29 x 40MM rims, Novatec hubs. 

29x3 Chupacabras. 

Stranglehold dropouts set forward

New Centreline rotors 180f/160r


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Swerny said:


> Finally got my 29+ setup done.
> 
> XM Carbonspeed 29 x 40MM rims, Novatec hubs.
> 
> ...


I have a similar build on my 9.6.
I have the 29x3.0 Chupacabras's mounted tubeless on a wheelset that I built using I9 Torch hubs and Nextie 52mm carbon rims. I'm about 2kg lighter on the wheelset and tires.
I put on a 100mm travel Manitou Magnum Pro fork on it. It added back a bit of the weight savings but is a lot easier on my body.
Like you I am also running the dropouts all the way forward.
Liking the package so far but early days.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

JackP42 said:


> I have a similar build on my 9.6.
> I have the 29x3.0 Chupacabras's mounted tubeless on a wheelset that I built using I9 Torch hubs and Nextie 52mm carbon rims. I'm about 2kg lighter on the wheelset and tires.
> I put on a 100mm travel Manitou Magnum Pro fork on it. It added back a bit of the weight savings but is a lot easier on my body.
> Like you I am also running the dropouts all the way forward.
> Liking the package so far but early days.


Just out of curiosity. Is the difference in wheelsets noticeable when you ride? And does it make the ride that much more enjoyable to justify the large cost of the new wheel set? I currently am riding a set of 26 carbon wheels on a 9.8 frame with 26x4 Jumbo Jim's and am strongly considering a set of 29+ wheels.


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Negotiator50 said:


> Just out of curiosity. Is the difference in wheelsets noticeable when you ride? And does it make the ride that much more enjoyable to justify the large cost of the new wheel set? I currently am riding a set of 26 carbon wheels on a 9.8 frame with 26x4 Jumbo Jim's and am strongly considering a set of 29+ wheels.


For me the driving factor was putting on a suspension fork for the summer, and I didn't want to put on a Bluto or some unknown Asia fork. A secondary factor was trying to get the wheel & tire weight down since I don't really need the full floatation of fat in the summer. For my conditions, I am likely this for the summer, but likely will go back to rigid and fat for the winter.
As you are running 26x4, one change you will notice going to 29+ is raising the bike up and the higher BB due to wheel size. The 29+ is about 1" larger in diameter compared to the stock 27.5x3.8 setup, so I would assume it would be even a bit more coming from 26x4. This has its pros and cons so it depends on your local trails and your preference.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Some observations on my F5 I've been running since November of last year. Bike is stock apart from some SDG Han Solo grips & Nukeproof Neutron pedals. I'm amazed at the downhill speed you can get on this bike. Fastest I've been on a road bike is 62kph down a smooth road. Took my F5 down a country road with not great surface and reached 58kph. I'll be honest...I was just worried that the disc brakes were going to overheat and fail (if that can even happen). Road Climbing - I've achieved my 2nd best climbing times ranked against my other XC bikes. I was expecting the Farley to come in last but it didn't. Maybe it's the bigger wheel/tyre size/traction & contact patch....the better gearing...who knows! I think Trek really nailed it with the Farley. My only disappointment is that the front hub/wheel would need to be rebuilt if I wanted to run a Bluto or other fat suspension fork. I am so glad I bought it though and is always a talking point on rides. Usually the first thing people say is "I've seen the fat tyres before but never ones that big!"


----------



## hammerite (May 6, 2016)

paulphilly said:


> My new Farley 9


That is such a good looking color scheme. Love the bar ends matching the bottle cages and TREK logo.


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

My Farley 5 with all updates so far. Sorry about too many pictures but I just got the Samyang 7.5mm fisheye lens


----------



## carbuncle (Dec 9, 2005)

Very nice 5! I have my eye on one for next year, great spec for the price.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Built up a 27.5x50mm wheelset for my 5. Even rigid it is plenty of fun. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dEOS (May 25, 2009)

jpaa, beautiful pictures.

How do you like that Brooks saddle?


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

dEOS said:


> jpaa, beautiful pictures.
> 
> How do you like that Brooks saddle?


It's ok, I like it in the fatbike. I have a warning though - it's hard as a rock.


----------



## hammerite (May 6, 2016)

Jpaa those are great shots. Thanks for sharing. The Brooks saddle caught my eye too as I don't think I've seen one that wasn't leather or one with a cutout in the center.

What trail is that? It looks pretty relaxed


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

hammerite said:


> Jpaa those are great shots. Thanks for sharing. The Brooks saddle caught my eye too as I don't think I've seen one that wasn't leather or one with a cutout in the center.
> 
> What trail is that? It looks pretty relaxed


Thanks, the trail is in Finland in my hometown. It's almost my backyard to go and just a place to relax. No thinking - nothing, just birds singing  I don't do any exercise in there, just wheelies etc. Standing and watching when the river goes by. Morning and evening is the best!


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

JackP42 said:


> The stock 9.8 BB is the Race Face BB92 part number BB4112430B15.


Anyone suggest any other options for the bottom bracket? These race face ones haven't fared well for me. I know wheels manufacturing makes one. Anything else that will work?

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Negotiator50 said:


> Anyone suggest any other options for the bottom bracket? These race face ones haven't fared well for me. I know wheels manufacturing makes one. Anything else that will work?
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


i installed this on my 9.8 since the stock one was trashed.

BB86 to 30MM Flanged, Dual Row PressFit 86/92 ABEC-3 Bottom Bracket


----------



## EBG 18T (Dec 31, 2005)

Check with Hope.


----------



## teletele (Sep 11, 2013)

Anyone have any problems with breaking pawls on the rear hub? My buddy is riding a 9 and we heard a clicking noise coming from his rear hub halfway through a ride the other day. He took it to the LBS and one of the pawls snapped. He is a clyde but doesn't ride overly aggressive. Cant find much on the inter webs about the Jackalope hubs.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

I have a 9.8 with over 2600 miles on it not a single issue. I do think this has a different rest hub but not 100% sure.


----------



## cborrman (Sep 23, 2008)

*sizing*

Anyone got a view on sizing? In the UK they seem to have skipped their virtual size 18.5 which is my size (1.73m, 5ft 8in) so I am to choose a short 17.5 or a long 19.5. How do they come up? I am pretty happy with an 18in Kona Unit and a 17.5 spesh stumpie hardtail...


----------



## Robg68 (Oct 27, 2013)

teletele said:


> Anyone have any problems with breaking pawls on the rear hub? My buddy is riding a 9 and we heard a clicking noise coming from his rear hub halfway through a ride the other day. He took it to the LBS and one of the pawls snapped. He is a clyde but doesn't ride overly aggressive. Cant find much on the inter webs about the Jackalope hubs.


I have a Farley 6 and I'm a Clyde and I broke one of the Pawls and I'm also trying to find out if I can just replace the pawls or do I have to buy a new freehub

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

cborrman said:


> Anyone got a view on sizing? In the UK they seem to have skipped their virtual size 18.5 which is my size (1.73m, 5ft 8in) so I am to choose a short 17.5 or a long 19.5. How do they come up? I am pretty happy with an 18in Kona Unit and a 17.5 spesh stumpie hardtail...


I think you would need the size you don't have.

I'm 1.83 and riding the 19.5 virtual/18.5 actual and love the fit.


----------



## teletele (Sep 11, 2013)

Robg68 said:


> I have a Farley 6 and I'm a Clyde and I broke one of the Pawls and I'm also trying to find out if I can just replace the pawls or do I have to buy a new freehub
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


The lbs for my bud replaced with the stock pawls but did say something about getting a better replacement with more pawls...not sure of the details.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I personally would use the opportunity to switch to another hub, DT Swiss for instance.


----------



## cborrman (Sep 23, 2008)

Swerny said:


> I think you would need the size you don't have.
> 
> I'm 1.83 and riding the 19.5 virtual/18.5 actual and love the fit.


Thanks! I think you are right. Your height puts you bang in middle of your size, mine has me just out of 17.5 and nowhere near 19.5 however I did wish I had listened to advice when I went from a Spesh Epic to stumpie FSR to go one size up - I didn't and always felt crampped on the 2009 and then again frame replacement 2011... so was wondering if anyone who was between sizes which way they went: am inclined to go bigger and change stem / bars?

Anyone any idea why Trek is not making 18.5 size Farley?


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

I'm 5'6 on a 17.5" (virtual) with a shorter stem. I don't think you would be cramped unless you had really short legs for your height. (For reference, I also have a 17" Giant Talon hard tail which is spot-on, and a 54cm road bike.)


----------



## teletele (Sep 11, 2013)

Misterg said:


> I'm 5'6 on a 17.5" (virtual) with a shorter stem. I don't think you would be cramped unless you had really short legs for your height.


Same 5'6" and ride a 17.5" as well with a short stem and it fits perfect.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

teletele said:


> Same 5'6" and ride a 17.5" as well with a short stem and it fits perfect.


5'9" with 35mm stem on 17.5 virtual and it's spot on.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

I'm 5'7" and on a 17.5". Sometimes I feel I'm too stretched out. Care to share what measurement a "short" stem is and what you are using? 

Thanks


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

In my case, I have a 70mm, 8° stem flipped over to put the bars in the higher position, and run 1 spacer between the stem and the headset.


----------



## Hobine (Jun 16, 2004)

Going to build up a 9.8 frame soon and have a couple questions that I couldn't find answers to. I plan on using many parts I already have and upgrade as they wear out. 
I can't find one Farley with SRAM XX1 cranks on it. Any reason they wouldn't work? I'm planning the 170mm rear end version with a flipped DM ring. 
Also have a 120mm Bluto already. Is 120 too much on a Farley?


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

> Is 120 too much on a Farley?


No, not for me 

(I run 3 tokens in it on a Farley 5, btw)


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Robg68 said:


> I have a Farley 6 and I'm a Clyde and I broke one of the Pawls and I'm also trying to find out if I can just replace the pawls or do I have to buy a new freehub
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


My rear hub locked up on Saturday. One pawl partially broke as well. LBS mechanic couldn't find a pawl rebuild kit listing. Price is $150CDN for a new freehub. I insisted a warranty claim as it is barely 2 months old.

I can't find any details on the "Bontrager alloy hubs" listed.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

i was cleaning my 9.8 Tuesday and noticed cracks in the seat stays and across the back of the seat post tube. the bike is at the shop waiting to hear back from Trek on what they are going to do. kind of a bummer but i have only seen a few others on here with these breaks and the one 9.6 frame broke so this must just be some bad luck.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

with all the broken carbon I am reading about, i'm glad I went with the 7...despite the Barney theme


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Swerny said:


> with all the broken carbon I am reading about, i'm glad I went with the 7...despite the Barney theme


I've broken 3 aluminum fat frames from a very well known fat-bike company. There is no such thing as a magic frame material that will never break, **** happens.


----------



## 127.0.0.1 (Nov 19, 2013)

teletele said:


> Anyone have any problems with breaking pawls on the rear hub? My buddy is riding a 9 and we heard a clicking noise coming from his rear hub halfway through a ride the other day. He took it to the LBS and one of the pawls snapped. He is a clyde but doesn't ride overly aggressive. Cant find much on the inter webs about the Jackalope hubs.


I have a Farley 6 with stock block in back, and I have the occasional 'KONK'
from the freehub pawl...but it is the classic 'once or twice in a ride' and only when unloading then loading torque. I am gonna keep it that way... experience tells me it
can stay this way literally forever until the rest of the bike wears out...but if it gets worse will replace freehub

so, yes, in summary: the stock freehub blows goats

I don't know about jackalope hubs tho


----------



## cborrman (Sep 23, 2008)

Negotiator50 said:


> 5'9" with 35mm stem on 17.5 virtual and it's spot on.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


Thanks all, 17.5 it is then...


----------



## Hobine (Jun 16, 2004)

My 17.5 frame came in. Let the build begin!


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Uh oh.....

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> Yes sir have had one for about three month that along with the e thirteen 9-44 is great.


Did you get your e 13 local?
I am getting ready to head north in a few days and need to get this squared away.
Thanks.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> Did you get your e 13 local?
> I am getting ready to head north in a few days and need to get this squared away.
> Thanks.


I had Tom's mobile bike get it for me. I have not seen any local. It only took a few days to get. 
http://m.tomsmobilebikerepair.com/

T


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> I had Tom's mobile bike get it for me. I have not seen any local. It only took a few days to get.
> http://m.tomsmobilebikerepair.com/
> 
> T


Thanks for the info. I spoke to him and ended up ordering direct from the hive so I could get it before leaving town.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## lovemachine (Jun 9, 2015)

So I'm curious. I have a Farley 6 now, and I love it. But I'm considering another Farley so I can run the larger 4.7" tires.

Would the Farley 5 be an upgrade to my current 6? Or should I be looking at the Farley 7?


----------



## MikMak (Jun 30, 2016)

Natedeezy said:


> Well it looks like there is plenty of clearance, decided to put my Bud and Lou on Clowns on.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hi Natedeezy
Looks so cool with those fat tyres. Could you meassure the q Factor for me on your bike ? It seems very narrow and I looking for a frame that can take a q Factor of 200 mm 
What crankset do you use ? 
Cheers 
Michael


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> Uh oh.....
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I did the same thing. Didn't notice it until I was doing a deep clean. I rode it for another 200 miles like that. The whole drive train was worn out anyway so everything got replaced.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Jeff_G said:


> I did the same thing. Didn't notice it until I was doing a deep clean. I rode it for another 200 miles like that. The whole drive train was worn out anyway so everything got replaced.


I should have just rode it till total failure like you. I ordered up a new cassette and and then made a mess of taking the old one off. I thought it would come off similar to a freehub setup and it ended up in the shop anyhow. I would like to get it back before I head out of town for the week, but reality says no.

I put a new chainring on last month and have a new chain installed for the new cassette. Hope to get it back soon.


----------



## Hobine (Jun 16, 2004)

Almost finished.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

*Cracked 9.6 frame*

My wife was riding her 2016 Farley 9.6 today and heard a pop. She was riding on a relatively flat trail at a moderate speed. No shifting or mashing going on at the time. When we got back I was washing her bike and found a horizontal crack in her frame on the seat tube at the top of the intersection with the seat stays.

After doing some research it looks like some other frames have cracked there. Strange considering the frame would normally be in compression at that point and my wife only weighs 130lbs.

Will be calling my LBS later to start a claim.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

geop said:


> My rear hub locked up on Saturday. One pawl partially broke as well. LBS mechanic couldn't find a pawl rebuild kit listing. Price is $150CDN for a new freehub. I insisted a warranty claim as it is barely 2 months old.
> 
> I can't find any details on the "Bontrager alloy hubs" listed.


Trek warrantied with a complete hub. I pick up this afternoon. Nice work Trek.


----------



## Voibaf (Jul 9, 2016)

Hobine said:


> Almost finished.


hello my name is Fabio and I write from Italy
congratulations on your beautiful bike
can I ask you , please, such as circles use
I also have a Farley who is now the Jackalope .
thank you
Fabio


----------



## Hobine (Jun 16, 2004)

Voibaf said:


> hello my name is Fabio and I write from Italy
> congratulations on your beautiful bike
> can I ask you , please, such as circles use
> I also have a Farley who is now the Jackalope .
> ...


Hi Fabio,
I picked up the wheels used. The rims are Dengfu 29+ 50mm wide.


----------



## Voibaf (Jul 9, 2016)

Hobine said:


> Hi Fabio,
> I picked up the wheels used. The rims are Dengfu 29+ 50mm wide.


Hi & tks you very much for your reply
congrat again for your Farley
see you soon
Fabio


----------



## AudioHavenMN (Apr 26, 2016)

Sizing opinions, please. I've had and sold (regrettably) a medium 2015 Specialized Fatboy Expert and now have a medium 2016 RSD Mayor Build 2.

I've been wanting a Farley for awhile now - I'm after the Farley 7 or Farley 9.6. I was told and have read here that they can run a bit small. It seems I might be somewhere between the 17.5 and 19.5. Which way would you lean? Towards the larger 19.5? Or smaller 17.5?

I'm about 5'9" with a 29.5" - 30" inseam and 175 lbs (down from 205 since April).

Thanks in advance for your advice.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

AudioHavenMN said:


> Sizing opinions, please. I've had and sold (regrettably) a medium 2015 Specialized Fatboy Expert and now have a medium 2016 RSD Mayor Build 2.
> 
> I've been wanting a Farley for awhile now - I'm after the Farley 7 or Farley 9.6. I was told and have read here that they can run a bit small. It seems I might be somewhere between the 17.5 and 19.5. Which way would you lean? Towards the larger 19.5? Or smaller 17.5?
> 
> ...


I'm 5' 11" and weigh 185 lb.
I have a 19.5 and love it!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tunalic (Feb 13, 2012)

AudioHavenMN said:


> Sizing opinions, please.
> I've been wanting a Farley for awhile now - I'm after the Farley 7 or Farley 9.6. I was told and have read here that they can run a bit small. It seems I might be somewhere between the 17.5 and 19.5. Which way would you lean? Towards the larger 19.5? Or smaller 17.5?
> 
> I'm about 5'9" with a 29.5" - 30" inseam and 175 lbs (down from 205 since April).


I was liking the 7 too but my LBS had a 9.6 in 17.5" and let me have it for 1/3 off. After putting the 4.5" Barbegazies on I am quite happy with this size!

I am 5'9.5" with a 31" inseam.


----------



## Hobine (Jun 16, 2004)

Finally got the bike finished up. The brakes I was planning on using blew out first pull so I had to order new calipers which delayed my initial ride by a week. 
Besides the frame, the only new parts are the crankset, cassette and the unexpected brakes. Drivetrain is X9 10 speed with a SunRace 11-42 cassette. Build set up with the 29+ wheels, Bluto, Dropper, pedals and the boat anchor ISM saddle that I use comes in at 26.5 lbs. 
Really happy with how this bike rides, very different than my old Mukluk. Fast, smooth and responsive. Looking forward to getting more saddle time.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

likeaboss said:


> My wife was riding her 2016 Farley 9.6 today and heard a pop. She was riding on a relatively flat trail at a moderate speed. No shifting or mashing going on at the time. When we got back I was washing her bike and found a horizontal crack in her frame on the seat tube at the top of the intersection with the seat stays.
> 
> After doing some research it looks like some other frames have cracked there. Strange considering the frame would normally be in compression at that point and my wife only weighs 130lbs.
> 
> ...


I took my frame in yesterday and the LBS was very nonchalant about the claim. They basically said I should receive a new frame shortly. I have a feeling this is a known issue at Trek and some bike shops have seen similar failures.

This is funny. I disassembled everything but the BB. I only have a Park Tool BB90.3 that requires hitting the tool with a hammer to remove the BB. I would prefer to use an Enduro press tool on a CF frame so I elected to have the LBS remove it. They said no problem and proceeded to pull out their 90.3 and whack it with a hammer until the BB popped out. I figured it was not a problem since I should be getting a new frame. But very disconcerting to see a kid whacking at a CF frame with a BFH!

BTW, not my regular LBS. Just went to them because they could do the Trek warranty claim.


----------



## AudioHavenMN (Apr 26, 2016)

LunchRider said:


> I'm 5' 11" and weigh 185 lb.
> I have a 19.5 and love it!





Tunalic said:


> I was liking the 7 too but my LBS had a 9.6 in 17.5" and let me have it for 1/3 off. After putting the 4.5" Barbegazies on I am quite happy with this size!
> 
> I am 5'9.5" with a 31" inseam.


Sounds like I should probably be shooting for a 17.5" after all.


----------



## moshock (Jun 9, 2015)

AudioHavenMN said:


> Sounds like I should probably be shooting for a 17.5" after all.


Worth checking this out: Sizing Charts | Trek Bikes

I'm 5'11" and 200lbs, LBS recommended 19.5"


----------



## bme107 (Jul 23, 2008)

likeaboss said:


> ...... proceeded to pull out their 90.3 and whack it with a hammer until the BB popped out. ...... But very disconcerting to see a kid whacking at a CF frame with a BFH!.


Many people are uneasy with this. You've got a CF wonder-bike and a staple of the regular maintenance program is a hammer for the BB. :skep:


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

likeaboss said:


> I took my frame in yesterday and the LBS was very nonchalant about the claim. They basically said I should receive a new frame shortly. I have a feeling this is a known issue at Trek and some bike shops have seen similar failures.
> 
> This is funny. I disassembled everything but the BB. I only have a Park Tool BB90.3 that requires hitting the tool with a hammer to remove the BB. I would prefer to use an Enduro press tool on a CF frame so I elected to have the LBS remove it. They said no problem and proceeded to pull out their 90.3 and whack it with a hammer until the BB popped out. I figured it was not a problem since I should be getting a new frame. But very disconcerting to see a kid whacking at a CF frame with a BFH!
> 
> BTW, not my regular LBS. Just went to them because they could do the Trek warranty claim.


LBS called today and said they have a new frame and fork waiting for us. The frame is a 9.8. Too bad they didn't decide to throw in some carbon wheels for our inconvenience!


----------



## AudioHavenMN (Apr 26, 2016)

moshock said:


> Worth checking this out: Sizing Charts | Trek Bikes
> 
> I'm 5'11" and 200lbs, LBS recommended 19.5"


Yep - I'm smack dab in the middle of the 17.5 & 19.5  I suppose that means I could go either way, I just thought I'd see if there were enough others on here that were in a similar position and which way they went. I'm thinking 17.5 is probably the better route for me.


----------



## glockrocket17 (Aug 26, 2015)

AudioHavenMN said:


> Yep - I'm smack dab in the middle of the 17.5 & 19.5  I suppose that means I could go either way, I just thought I'd see if there were enough others on here that were in a similar position and which way they went. I'm thinking 17.5 is probably the better route for me.


I'm 5'10.5" 225lbs and I went with the 17.5 and love it. The 19.5 felt a little to long to me.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

On size, my wife and I are 5'10" and share a Farley 8 in the 19.5 size. It's a little big, we have a short stem on it, but also feels better going fast and steep than 17.5 Farley 5 and similar bikes we'll rent. I'm testing current models so we can stop renting on nice snow days and will probably get 17.5 if it's a Trek.

If anything feels wrong with these bikes - our Farley 8 or renting and testing 2016 models - it's missing the more slack feel our other bikes have.

The 27.5 fat bike wheel with few tire options and what bike for two sets of wheels is much harder on the brain. Getting a second fat bike will mean giving up another bike and likely the beloved Honzo. I'm searching out what plus tire wheel set option might be as fun as that bike and then swap to true fat tires in winter.

Even getting a skinnier set of wheels figured out leaves me wondering about the 27.5 fat wheel with few tire options. It stands out to me that Bontrager Rougarou tires are not in that size. So far homework on new tires has only shown some other Bontrager tires coming out soon.

Such first world problems.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

Teton29er said:


> I got a 9.6 Farley. Here's my mini-review:
> 
> I spent about month researching bikes. This was a lot of money for me to spend, but fat biking year round is my primary recreation and a big part of my life. I wanted to move on from my highly upgraded pugs ops. Early in my search I started to focus on Trek. Each model seemed to have a leg up over the competitors as far as specs. The primary attractions of the Farley line was: thru axles, adjustable and short chainstays, 1x11, no tire limitations, reasonable Q-factor and good components for the money.
> 
> ...


Are you as happy around 9 months later?

The lack of tire options has me hesitate. I keep thinking I'll want plus wheels and a Bluto to be happy with this bike. More accurately, happy with it as a replacement or general summer riding bike.

It seems like the Barbegazi option will satisfy my concerns for winter. Having a Farley 8 with 26 x 3.8 Hodags I know that's not a lot of fun on the 2.1 mi to trail head.

Thanks.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

bitflogger said:


> Are you as happy around 9 months later?
> 
> The lack of tire options has me hesitate. I keep thinking I'll want plus wheels and a Bluto to be happy with this bike. More accurately, happy with it as a replacement or general summer riding bike.
> 
> ...


I would say his review is similar to what I would write after buying my bike last fall. I rode mine all winter on snow and fall on the beach with the 3.8" 27.5" stock configuration with no issues. I picked up the new 27.5" x 4.5" tires for this winter. Apparently they are actually same weight or slightly lighter than the 3.8" tires. I'm going to stud them for the winter.

J.


----------



## fatboy43 (May 4, 2008)

bitflogger said:


> On size, my wife and I are 5'10" and share a Farley 8 in the 19.5 size. It's a little big, we have a short stem on it, but also feels better going fast and steep than 17.5 Farley 5 and similar bikes we'll rent. I'm testing current models so we can stop renting on nice snow days and will probably get 17.5.


It's funny how different people are. I'm only 5-9 and felt very uncomfortable on the 17.5. The large felt perfect. On my old fatboy it was the opposite. The only way to tell for sure, if your height is in between sizes on the manufacturers chart, is to test ride.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

bitflogger said:


> Are you as happy around 9 months later?
> 
> The lack of tire options has me hesitate. I keep thinking I'll want plus wheels and a Bluto to be happy with this bike. More accurately, happy with it as a replacement or general summer riding bike.
> 
> ...


I can't speak to the tire options and those wheels since I bought the frame only. However, I can give you my experience with the Bluto and carbon fork. I built up the 9.8 frame with a bluto right from the start and rode it as such for about a month. On a whim, I decided to install the carbon fork that came with the frame and have been riding it as such for the last few weeks. I have to say that I honestly cannot tell much of a difference. I thought that the rigid fork would beat me up as my past experiences with rigids had. However, the trek with rigid fork is very smooth and absorbs pretty much most of the terrain that I ride here in southeast Michigan, and I don't see a need to go back to the Bluto.


----------



## Vegard (Jul 16, 2009)

What is tire selection like for the 27.5 rims on the farley?


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

Vegard said:


> What is tire selection like for the 27.5 rims on the farley?


The obvious or readily available are Bontrager Barbegazi and Hodag at 4.5 and 3.8 in width. Some tell me the 3.5 in Fat B Nimble and 3.25 Vee tire are really for plus bikes and not the 75 mm wide Bontrager rim.

One of my hopes for today or tomorrow is take the Farley 8 with 26 x 3.8 Hodag and my Meiser gauge to Trek dealer and compare with 27.5 Farley 9.6.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

tadraper said:


> I had Tom's mobile bike get it for me. I have not seen any local. It only took a few days to get.
> http://m.tomsmobilebikerepair.com/
> 
> T


Thanks for sharing this. I had him out to replace my BB toady. Outstanding!!!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

That's great Tom does great work


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

Hobine said:


> Finally got the bike finished up. The brakes I was planning on using blew out first pull so I had to order new calipers which delayed my initial ride by a week.
> Besides the frame, the only new parts are the crankset, cassette and the unexpected brakes. Drivetrain is X9 10 speed with a SunRace 11-42 cassette. Build set up with the 29+ wheels, Bluto, Dropper, pedals and the boat anchor ISM saddle that I use comes in at 26.5 lbs.
> Really happy with how this bike rides, very different than my old Mukluk. Fast, smooth and responsive. Looking forward to getting more saddle time.


How much clearance between top of the 29+ Bambolino and the Bluto?

I'm looking at the two sets of wheels scenario based on a Farley 9.6. It looks like 2017 Farley 9.6 will have 27.5 x 4.5 Barbagazi instead of Hodag - good for my interests. I'd like a set of plus wheels that best matches that OEM set. That seems more like a not too big 29+ than 27.5 plus many have advised.

How easy is it to pop up the front end? I rode shop model 9.6 against our Farley 8 and with the wheel all the way back I found it no way as playful or wheelie hop off of something easy as our Farley 8. My guess is that axle has to be set all the way forward to have same chain stay length as our Farley 8.

Thanks.


----------



## Hobine (Jun 16, 2004)

bitflogger said:


> How much clearance between top of the 29+ Bambolino and the Bluto?
> 
> I'm looking at the two sets of wheels scenario based on a Farley 9.6. It looks like 2017 Farley 9.6 will have 27.5 x 4.5 Barbagazi instead of Hodag - good for my interests. I'd like a set of plus wheels that best matches that OEM set. That seems more like a not too big 29+ than 27.5 plus many have advised.
> 
> ...


I measure 8mm clearance between the Bluto and Bambolini. No issues at all.
The 29+ set up fits with the sliders all the forward and measures 17.5 chainstay length. I'm liking the way this bike manuals and wheelies, maybe the 120 Bluto helps a bit.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

For anyone that cant stand bikes that creak be very wary of the carbon farley 9.8. This thing is like a huge amplifier for creaking sounds from anywhere and everywhere. I have had over 10 bikes in my time including 4 carbon bikes and none have produced creaks quite like this frame. I have greased and lubed every part on the bike (hanger, dropouts, axles, chain, bottom bracket, cranks, pedals, seat rails, seat post, seat collar, you name it) several times. I always get the creaking to stop for a ride or two, but it always finds its way back.

The creaking only occurs when pedaling with force and usually uphill. Someone in this thread earlier suggested to grease the contacts between the derailleur hanger and the rear derailleur. While that eliminated the creaking for about a ride or two, as usual, it found it way back. Its driving me crazy and I have no idea what the solution is other than just getting a different frame.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

2016 vs 2017 (Jackalope vs Mulefut and Hodag vs Barbegazi and DB3 vs Level T)???

My wife and I are going to pull the trigger on a second fat bike. At the moment there are some current Farley 9.6 in stock and my preferred LBS says they should have a 2017 in a few weeks.

What I find entertaining.

-My obsession is working out second set of plus wheels to match.
-My wife's obsession is a family of 5 getting from 10 to 8 bikes in the garage.
-My wife likes the gray and blue 2016 more than orange and black 2017 _and_ likes a particular bargain available with a 2016.
-I'm thinking what component changes will be best.
-My wife thinks "just ride the bike".
-I don't like the way the DB3s we have can be noisy.
-My wife thinks "so what" because they're all better than her Schwinn Traveler was in winter.
-We both wonder if the upcharge from frame made of beer cans to plastic is worth it. We didn't think so for our Remedy and that bought us a used Farley 8.

I know my wife is right but......

Any strong reasons beyond color to get one model year over the other?



P.S. I still wonder about 2 tire choices with this bike but also wonder if Mulefuts coming in 27.5 mean far more tires will come in 27.5.


----------



## slowride454 (Jan 11, 2014)

my aluminum Farley 7 also creaks like crazy. I've tried a few things, but am thinking it might be the BB.



Negotiator50 said:


> For anyone that cant stand bikes that creak be very wary of the carbon farley 9.8. This thing is like a huge amplifier for creaking sounds from anywhere and everywhere. I have had over 10 bikes in my time including 4 carbon bikes and none have produced creaks quite like this frame. I have greased and lubed every part on the bike (hanger, dropouts, axles, chain, bottom bracket, cranks, pedals, seat rails, seat post, seat collar, you name it) several times. I always get the creaking to stop for a ride or two, but it always finds its way back.
> 
> The creaking only occurs when pedaling with force and usually uphill. Someone in this thread earlier suggested to grease the contacts between the derailleur hanger and the rear derailleur. While that eliminated the creaking for about a ride or two, as usual, it found it way back. Its driving me crazy and I have no idea what the solution is other than just getting a different frame.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Negotiator50 said:


> For anyone that cant stand bikes that creak be very wary of the carbon farley 9.8. This thing is like a huge amplifier for creaking sounds from anywhere and everywhere. I have had over 10 bikes in my time including 4 carbon bikes and none have produced creaks quite like this frame. I have greased and lubed every part on the bike (hanger, dropouts, axles, chain, bottom bracket, cranks, pedals, seat rails, seat post, seat collar, you name it) several times. I always get the creaking to stop for a ride or two, but it always finds its way back.
> 
> The creaking only occurs when pedaling with force and usually uphill. Someone in this thread earlier suggested to grease the contacts between the derailleur hanger and the rear derailleur. While that eliminated the creaking for about a ride or two, as usual, it found it way back. Its driving me crazy and I have no idea what the solution is other than just getting a different frame.


That may have been me who suggested something like that, can't remember and I don't care to look, but if it was me then we had a miscommunication. My friend has one of these and it creaked like crazy, he took apart/cleaned/greased the contact points between the rear derailleur hanger and the frame itself. Worked great for him.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

litespeedaddict said:


> That may have been me who suggested something like that, can't remember and I don't care to look, but if it was me then we had a miscommunication. My friend has one of these and it creaked like crazy, he took apart/cleaned/greased the contact points between the rear derailleur hanger and the frame itself. Worked great for him.


Thanks. Did that also, but the creaking came back. I think I am going to try one of those Wheels Manufacturing bottom brackets instead of the cheap race face one that comes with the bike and see if that solves it.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## larryniner (Apr 6, 2013)

I know I have missed this, but don;t want to read 60 pages. I have a farley 8 and can't figure out how to add a bash guard, any advice??????


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

Negotiator50 said:


> Thanks. Did that also, but the creaking came back. I think I am going to try one of those Wheels Manufacturing bottom brackets instead of the cheap race face one that comes with the bike and see if that solves it.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


I am building up a 9.8 frame with components from my cracked 9.6. I replaced the BB with a Wheels BB86/92. I have not ridden it yet but will let you know. My 9.6 had some minor creaks but nothing too obnoxious. When I disassembled the 9.6 I did notice, however, that there was no assembly lube between the Raceface BB and the frame.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

larryniner said:


> I know I have missed this, but don;t want to read 60 pages. I have a farley 8 and can't figure out how to add a bash guard, any advice??????


You could always try the search feature in this thread. Also, this a not a bike specific add-on so you could probably search all the forums for some help.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

likeaboss said:


> I am building up a 9.8 frame with components from my cracked 9.6. I replaced the BB with a Wheels BB86/92. I have not ridden it yet but will let you know. My 9.6 had some minor creaks but nothing too obnoxious. When I disassembled the 9.6 I did notice, however, that there was no assembly lube between the Raceface BB and the frame.


I rode 20 miles this past weekend and so far no creaking.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

likeaboss said:


> I rode 20 miles this past weekend and so far no creaking.


Just wondering if you have any further updates for us with that new bottom bracket and creaking.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

Negotiator50 said:


> Just wondering if you have any further updates for us with that new bottom bracket and creaking.


No too much as I only rode about 5 miles last weekend but I plan on riding tomorrow and Saturday. Still quiet as a mouse.


----------



## Red_Label (Sep 2, 2008)

bitflogger said:


> 2016 vs 2017 (Jackalope vs Mulefut and Hodag vs Barbegazi and DB3 vs Level T)???
> 
> My wife and I are going to pull the trigger on a second fat bike. At the moment there are some current Farley 9.6 in stock and my preferred LBS says they should have a 2017 in a few weeks.
> 
> ...


I don't have any knowledge regarding the 2017 Farley 9.6, but I REALLY love the 2016 model that I've had since early May and ride it every day. I really loved my 2014 SE Bikes [email protected] aluminum bike for the past two years and rode it almost every day. I've got plenty of X-rays, stitches, scars and bruises to prove how many miles I put on the SE. It was a complete TANK and I could throw it off a cliff and it wouldn't show a scratch. Despite my 215# weight and aggressive riding style, I couldn't hurt that bike (despite hurting myself plenty). But the fact of the matter is... the Farley carbon is SO much lighter and the slack steering angle seems to suit me better (in other words... it might result in less trips to the ER for me). I also like the flex of the carbon (since it's a fully-rigid bike) over the VERY stiff aluminum frame on the SE.

I'm not comparing apples to apples here, but my point is that as much as I loved my aluminum SE (still have it), the carbon Farley gets ALL the love now and I can't imagine many instances where I would choose to ride the aluminum bike over the carbon one from here on out. I mainly keep my old bike around as a loaner and a spare if need be. Tell your wife that the upgrade from beer cans to plastic is a HUGE deal (at least it sure was for me). I don't regret spending the $2500 for the Farley... despite money being tight and my wife giving me the stink eye over it.


----------



## Red_Label (Sep 2, 2008)

Negotiator50 said:


> For anyone that cant stand bikes that creak be very wary of the carbon farley 9.8. This thing is like a huge amplifier for creaking sounds from anywhere and everywhere. I have had over 10 bikes in my time including 4 carbon bikes and none have produced creaks quite like this frame. I have greased and lubed every part on the bike (hanger, dropouts, axles, chain, bottom bracket, cranks, pedals, seat rails, seat post, seat collar, you name it) several times. I always get the creaking to stop for a ride or two, but it always finds its way back.
> 
> The creaking only occurs when pedaling with force and usually uphill. Someone in this thread earlier suggested to grease the contacts between the derailleur hanger and the rear derailleur. While that eliminated the creaking for about a ride or two, as usual, it found it way back. Its driving me crazy and I have no idea what the solution is other than just getting a different frame.


My SE [email protected] creaked like crazy for the two years that I've had it. Drove me NUTS! I looked at everything and had others look at it, but just couldn't figure it out. I also (like you) noticed that it was only when the drive train was under load. I upgraded the drive train to all SLX and a bunch of other things, to no avail. And then one day I noticed that the creaking would stop for a while after I lubed the chain. I was using Rock & Roll, but switched over to the WD40 bike lube last year. Regardless, once I realized that it might be a lube issue, I just started relubing when the creaking would start up again (usually after several rides) and never had an issue with creaking since. Just throwing this info out there in case it helps someone.

I've had my Farley 9.6 since early May and really haven't noticed any regular creaks. Under my 215# weight, it's going to make a creak here and there... but it's not something that I even notice, unlike I did on the aluminum-framed SE.


----------



## Red_Label (Sep 2, 2008)

glockrocket17 said:


> I'm 5'10.5" 225lbs and I went with the 17.5 and love it. The 19.5 felt a little to long to me.


I'm 5'10" 215# and the 17.5 is perfect for me as well. My Trek dealer (Scheels in Billings, MT) had a 19.5" 9.6 and 8 for six months or so. I would go in there and drool over them, but it was easy for me to walk away because I knew that a large bike wouldn't work for me. It made my wife happy too. Then one day we were walking past and I see a 9.6 in the medium size and my wife knew it was all over. I test rode it that day, and then went in and laid-out the plastic on it the next day.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

I had a dream it snowed last night! Just had to share, it's been so darn hot lately!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

LunchRider said:


> I had a dream it snowed last night! Just had to share, it's been so darn hot lately!
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Nice. I bought my new Hok Skis yesterday. Will come in handy for back country skiing and packing out fat bike trails.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

LunchRider said:


> I had a dream it snowed last night! Just had to share, it's been so darn hot lately!





likeaboss said:


> Nice. I bought my new Hok Skis yesterday. Will come in handy for back country skiing and packing out fat bike trails.


Snow is some months away but my wife got interested to the extent she compared a closeout 2016 9.6 against our Farley 8.

With 3 kids who ski (one's already an instructor and twin Nordic racers) I have to factor that in the budget too!

My wife liked the 9.6 and likes the 2016 color more than 2017 orange. No matter what I'm sure I'd like the 2017's Barbegazi tires. Otherwise it looks like 2016 has better wheels and 2017 might have better brakes.


----------



## bberck (Sep 1, 2011)

Anyone had any issues with chain getting caught on crank arm peddaling thru a rough section? Its happend 3 times now and bends the derailleur hanger when it happens. 
Has the GX rear derailleur so thinking upgrading it to see if it helps.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

bberck said:


> Anyone had any issues with chain getting caught on crank arm peddaling thru a rough section? Its happend 3 times now and bends the derailleur hanger when it happens.
> Has the GX rear derailleur so thinking upgrading it to see if it helps.


Not sure exactly the question but I have almost 3k miles on my 9.8 and never had an issue like that.


----------



## bberck (Sep 1, 2011)

tadraper said:


> Not sure exactly the question but I have almost 3k miles on my 9.8 and never had an issue like that.


Here is a picture of what happens. Chain seems to bounce to much.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Wow nope never had that issue. Is you chain to long?


----------



## TuTone T (Dec 12, 2012)

Crank arm bent? Overlaps the chain line somehow.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

bberck said:


> Here is a picture of what happens. Chain seems to bounce to much.


Your chain should not exceed the frame. Your crank must be bent, chainlink kink, and/or front chainring is bent. I had a slight bend in a chainlink and it would cause chain jump. Check each link individually.


----------



## bberck (Sep 1, 2011)

geop said:


> Your chain should not exceed the frame. Your crank must be bent, chainlink kink, and/or front chainring is bent. I had a slight bend in a chainlink and it would cause chain jump. Check each link individually.


The chain doesnt exceed the frame normally. I pulled the chain out in the picture just to show how it catches. It bounces to much over some rough terrain allowing it to catch. It doesnt happen often but has 3 times. Always on a fast section so i end up bending rear hanger from the torque.

It has also happend with 2 different front sprockets. I thought the small 28tooth maybe the reason so went to a 32. Happened again with it. Crank arm isnt bent either.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

bberck said:


> The chain doesnt exceed the frame normally. I pulled the chain out in the picture just to show how it catches. It bounces to much over some rough terrain allowing it to catch. It doesnt happen often but has 3 times. Always on a fast section so i end up bending rear hanger from the torque.
> 
> It has also happend with 2 different front sprockets. I thought the small 28tooth maybe the reason so went to a 32. Happened again with it. Crank arm isnt bent either.


Clutch issues then - can you adjust the clutch in the GX derailler? A google search found this discussing:
http://forums.mtbr.com/drivetrain-shifters-derailleurs-cranks/sram-gx-clutch-issue-1008096.html

Good Luck!!


----------



## sb1616ne (Feb 13, 2008)

All the new SRAM 11 speed RD's have pins that stop you from adjusting the clutch. The older ones you could add more preload to the clutch bearing. Idk why they have stopped doing this. I have seen a ton of the new stuff from GX to X01 that the clutchs feel like they are doing nothing.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Might want to check your chain length. Might have too many links on that chain which is causing all that bouncing around in the lower gears.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

Check your chain wear. Could be too much lateral slop in a worn chain. Have you done anything with the BB? There is a spacer on my 9.6 on the drive side.

Also, could your heel be catching it?


----------



## bberck (Sep 1, 2011)

Thanks for all the suggestions. 

I am hopeing the chain is just to long. Its close to needing replaced anyway so going to put a new one on it and go from there.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

bberck said:


> Thanks for all the suggestions.
> 
> I am hopeing the chain is just to long. Its close to needing replaced anyway so going to put a new one on it and go from there.


I don't know if this is helpful or not but I've ridden my 7 about 3500 miles and never once has the chain come off or caught on my crank.


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Did you or the LBS slide the dropouts all the way forward without taking links out of the chain? You need to take out 2 links if you go from the back to forward position.


----------



## bberck (Sep 1, 2011)

Paochow said:


> Did you or the LBS slide the dropouts all the way forward without taking links out of the chain? You need to take out 2 links if you go from the back to forward position.


No the axle was all the way back.

I dropped it off today so they could straighten the rear hanger. They are going to put a new chain on and see if that helps. I am having them slide the axle forward while they are doing the new chain.


----------



## BikingDerek (Aug 9, 2016)

*New addition to the stable*

9.8 Farley, picked it up this past Sunday, can't wait to take it on the trails.


----------



## PhdPepper (Jun 7, 2016)

Beautiful Derek!
I'm jealous! 
Enjoy


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

likeaboss said:


> No too much as I only rode about 5 miles last weekend but I plan on riding tomorrow and Saturday. Still quiet as a mouse.


I have about 100 miles on the new BB and still quiet as a mouse. I did notice a little bit of a chirp when riding in the wet but has since disappeared. Might have been one of the external seals wearing in.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

likeaboss said:


> I have about 100 miles on the new BB and still quiet as a mouse. I did notice a little bit of a chirp when riding in the wet but has since disappeared. Might have been one of the external seals wearing in.


Thanks for the update. I couldn't stand the creaking under load anymore so I ordered the RWC Enduro bottom bracket yesterday:

http://www.enduroforkseals.com/id375.html

Let's hope that eliminates it.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

Well, it's Mr. & Mrs. Farley now.

My wife and I are truly between the 17.5 and 19.5 sizes and she liked the 17.5 with stock stem over our 19.5 Farley 8 with short stem. We picked up the last 2016 our favorite local shop has. A swap bikes ride after it was taken tubeless was interesting. With the Bluto bike rigid there's no doubt more basketball bounce action with 26 x 3.8 than the 27.5 x 3.8 Hodags. We did not mind riding the rigid 9.6 2.1 mi to trail head the way we do the Farley 8. I could have taken the larger frame with short stem but to be honest it seems complimentary to have it as we do.

The one crazy is the larger Farley 8 never seemed an issue in Winter as it does in summer. Add, the 27.5 Hodags more along well enough that I've for the moment dropped my obsession with plus wheels.

Up next: 

1. I haven't figured out the best dropper option for these. I'm assuming I could move our earlier Thomson over using the ports on the top tube. It appears that loose big port on lower down tube is for a dropper. There are lots of choices compared to when I got our Crank Bros Joplin.
2. Trying the Bluto on the Farley 8 is really tempting.
3. Wait for more 27.5 fat tire options. My friend who is in Bontrager product development said that is in the works.

I started a review of all these posts to learn about the dropper post setup but it's Monday, time to work, and need time to ride.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

bitflogger said:


> Well, it's Mr. & Mrs. Farley now.
> 
> My wife and I are truly between the 17.5 and 19.5 sizes and she liked the 17.5 with stock stem over our 19.5 Farley 8 with short stem. We picked up the last 2016 our favorite local shop has. A swap bikes ride after it was taken tubeless was interesting. With the Bluto bike rigid there's no doubt more basketball bounce action with 26 x 3.8 than the 27.5 x 3.8 Hodags. We did not mind riding the rigid 9.6 2.1 mi to trail head the way we do the Farley 8. I could have taken the larger frame with short stem but to be honest it seems complimentary to have it as we do.
> 
> ...


I have a RS stealth and love it. I felt the need to mention this since I gave it a bad review in this thread during the winter months. It just needed a good bleeding and has been solid ever since.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Tincup69 (Sep 5, 2012)

What is everyone doing for 29+ wheelsets? I'm not looking to break the bank just a decent set to tool around with. 

Thanks


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

LunchRider said:


> I have a RS stealth and love it. I felt the need to mention this since I gave it a bad review in this thread during the winter months. It just needed a good bleeding and has been solid ever since.


Thank you.

Assuming RS = RockShox Reverb stealth... We have one on a bike. One crash cost enough parts and annoying labor (fluid, bleeding) over the lever that was damaged for me to want a cable actuated unit like the Thomson we have on another bike. Maybe I should have qualified saying something less expensive than the Thomson.

With so much competition I figured it was worth looking at other products.



Tincup69 said:


> What is everyone doing for 29+ wheelsets? I'm not looking to break the bank just a decent set to tool around with.
> 
> Thanks


For not breaking the bank: I attempted to wake this post when I noticed the Framed wheels were inexpensive and on sale at their House shop. No replies yet.

http://forums.mtbr.com/26-27-5-29-plus-bikes/framed-29-wheelset-1002346.html

I've also made a spreadsheet with options and parts to build wheels. I don't know about the OEM hubs with those Framed wheels, but the 197 hubs limit choices and the modestly priced among them make the Framed wheels attractive or scary depending on your thoughts about performance and quality.

I'm not sure which bike you have but initial rides with our two different vintage Farleys have the 27.5 Hodags feeling faster. We kept our Honzo in the process of getting the 9.6 so that cut some urgency for plus wheels and so did trying some other bikes with plus wheels. More testing is ahead, but I might be happy with the 3.8 Hodags for non-snow season and I'm also waiting for more 27.5 fat tires. Rumors are more 27.5 tires coming - Bontrager and others.

Still, I'm all eyes and ears on plus wheel and any tire options for the 27.5 wheels.


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Tincup69 said:


> What is everyone doing for 29+ wheelsets? I'm not looking to break the bank just a decent set to tool around with.
> 
> Thanks


I have a Farley 9.6. I put on a 100mm travel Magnum fork and then built 29+ wheels with I9 hubs (great hubs and easy to deal with the 197 back and Boost front), Nextie NXT29JF52-II 52mm wide carbon rims, and double butted 2.0x1.7 Sapim spokes. Saved over 1kg over the stock 9.8 27.5x80mm wheelset. Really liking the 29+ but will likely switch back to fat from when the snow arrives.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

Any advice on cable vs hydraulic dropper actuation for a 9.x frame? An associate said the down tube entrance and bend by bottom bracket is too much of a bend for cable actuated dropper to work well.

Right now I'm using my old Joplin so a non-issue. I don't expect that thing to work forever unless it's 3 trips for service mean it's fixed for good. I'm also thinking I'll be using this bike more than expected so handlebar actuation would be nice.


----------



## Hobine (Jun 16, 2004)

My cable actuated Specialized Command post IR works just fine on my 9.8 so whatever you decide on should be OK.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Uh man. Wife says she likes my 9.8 and wants one.....you know what I'm thinking. I might have to give it to her and get myself the 9.9!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## evo3gsx (Sep 1, 2016)

I just swapped the stem and bars on my 2016 Farley 7 and upon reassembly, noticed a gap between the headset cover and the top of the frame. Unfortunately I didn't take note whether this gap was there prior to disassembly. Could someone with a Farley 7 check to see if they have this gap too? Everything feels solid but just want to make sure I'm not missing something.


----------



## Red_Label (Sep 2, 2008)

evo3gsx said:


> I just swapped the stem and bars on my 2016 Farley 7 and upon reassembly, noticed a gap between the headset cover and the top of the frame. Unfortunately I didn't take note whether this gap was there prior to disassembly. Could someone with a Farley 7 check to see if they have this gap too? Everything feels solid but just want to make sure I'm not missing something.
> 
> View attachment 1091460


Dunno about the 7, but I'm looking at my 9.6 next to my desk right now and there's no gaps on it. Maybe a seating issue?


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Red_Label said:


> Dunno about the 7, but I'm looking at my 9.6 next to my desk right now and there's no gaps on it. Maybe a seating issue?


Check the race, it's possibly in there upside down?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

So, let's talk Bluto. 

I know the Farley 9 comes with a 100 mm travel Bluto. 

I am running 29+ carbon hoops on my Farley 7 with 3 inch Chupacabra tires for summer use and after a weekend of bouncing off rocks and roots, i have decided to get a Bluto for my bike. 

I will keep the carbon fork for winter use. 

Is anyone running the 120 mm travel Bluto? if so, how is the handling?

I'm torn between the 100 or 120, either way it will be an RCT3.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

I have a 120mm Bluto on a Farley 5 - it's fine.

Whichever you choose*, I think it's only an air shaft change to change the travel - you may find someone wanting to go to 100 - 120mm to swap with if you decide to go 120 - 100mm.

I would get some bottomless tokens though - I can't remember if I'm running 2 or 3, but they make a big difference.

(* I guess if you were overly concerned with potential warranty issues, it might be better to go with the 100mm, as I assume that's what Trek are expecting)


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Swerny said:


> So, let's talk Bluto.
> 
> I know the Farley 9 comes with a 100 mm travel Bluto.
> 
> ...


Consider the Wren suspension fork. While the Bluto is a decent fork, its my understanding that the Wren blows it out of the water.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Misterg said:


> I have a 120mm Bluto on a Farley 5 - it's fine.
> 
> Whichever you choose*, I think it's only an air shaft change to change the travel - you may find someone wanting to go to 100 - 120mm to swap with if you decide to go 120 - 100mm.
> 
> ...


yes, i have read about the tokens, and know about the cartridge change, thanks.

I had the original Mayor that had an 80 mm Bluto and had looked into going to 100 mm.

I am buying it new, so I just want to make the "right" choice the first time.

Good point about the warranty



Negotiator50 said:


> Consider the Wren suspension fork. While the Bluto is a decent fork, its my understanding that the Wren blows it out of the water.


I have read about the Wren, I think it's overkill for me and my riding style, plus it costs a lot more than the Bluto's I'm considering ($480).

Thanks though


----------



## sml-2727 (Nov 16, 2013)

Anyone know the weight of a farley 9?


----------



## burtjason (Oct 31, 2015)

My 17.5" Farley 9 is about 30lbs.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Can anyone who purchased a complete bike tell me how many spacers they have between the bottom bracket and crank arms? I bought the frame only and when putting on my race face Turbine cinch cranks with 170 spindle, I am having to add 3 spacers to each side to remove any play in the crank. Pictures of the crank area showing the spacers would be nice too.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

I just built my 9.8 frame up and I used the Wheels mf BB86/92 BB and Raceface Aeffect cranks with the measurements 24mm, 24mm x 170.

I used 1 small spacer between the frame and BB on the drive side. I then used the BB seal and 1 spacer(thinest) on each side. 

You probably just need to add the spacer to the BB drive side to get it down to the single crank spacers,

HTH


----------



## vitorn (Aug 9, 2016)

Hey guys;
Do any of you know where I can buy a 27.5 x [15x150 + 12x197] wheelset ??
I want to change out my 26 set and ride a 3.8" tires with the above wheelset

Thank you


----------



## Giant13182 (Mar 6, 2012)

Picked up my 2016 9.6 couple weeks ago. About 50 miles on it.. Tons of fun. LBS had 2017 in stock so I got a great deal. Plus the 2017 9.6 does not come with the jackalope wheels so I'm glad I pulled the trigger.


----------



## burtjason (Oct 31, 2015)

Why don't you like the Jackalope wheels?


----------



## Giant13182 (Mar 6, 2012)

I should have clarified, i picked up a 2016 with the Jackalope wheels. Running tubeless and they work great. Plus dropped some lbs.


----------



## burtjason (Oct 31, 2015)

Ok....got it. I put Jackalope wheels on my new 2017 9.6. Love them.


----------



## Giant13182 (Mar 6, 2012)

How does the orange look?


----------



## burtjason (Oct 31, 2015)

I have to admit....I was waaaay surprised. Not a big fan of orange. This bike is a head turner. Put XXX carbon bars on with a carbon seatpost and it rides smooth as butter. Made the right decision.


----------



## Giant13182 (Mar 6, 2012)

Guys, noticed my top tube internal cable cover popped out. Assume its a simple push pin with the plastic cover. Anyone ever replace these? I know, not the worst thing that can happen.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Negotiator50 said:


> Thanks for the update. I couldn't stand the creaking under load anymore so I ordered the RWC Enduro bottom bracket yesterday:
> 
> http://www.enduroforkseals.com/id375.html
> 
> Let's hope that eliminates it.


Just wanted to give an update. The new RWC bottom bracket stopped the creaking for about 2 to 3 rides. Then it started acting up again. Now, after 5-6 rides, it is more consistent and louder than with the Raceface bottom bracket. I think I am done with this frame. I started looking at other frames with 197 rear spacing and non press fit bottom brackets. Any suggestions?


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Negotiator50 said:


> Just wanted to give an update. The new RWC bottom bracket stopped the creaking for about 2 to 3 rides. Then it started acting up again. Now, after 5-6 rides, it is more consistent and louder than with the Raceface bottom bracket. I think I am done with this frame. I started looking at other frames with 197 rear spacing and non press fit bottom brackets. Any suggestions?


Do not give up on this frame. It is probably not your bottom bracket, but here is a list of things I check whenever there is a strange noise.
1. I usually pull the cranks out first and clean then, apply a little grease and re assemble to factory specs.
2. Check your chain ring, make sure all is torqued to spec. Every now and then, pull it apart, clean all the mud/sand out and apply a small amount or grease.
3. Pedals - Pull them apart and grease the internals, also apply a bit of grease the threads where they go into the crank arms.
4. Rear Derailleur - If your noise is an oscillation and does not match your pedaling rhythm, then clean the mechanism with WD-40 then use some chain lube on it.
5. Cassettte - I pull the cassette and make sure all looks good in the XD Driver every now and then, but this is only if I get too over zealous with cleaning.

My Farley fell off of my bike rack doing 80 this weekend on the way up to a race. I was horrified to see it bouncing down the freeway! I picked it up (just in time, some dude was loading into the back of his pickup) and all I replaced was the rear derailleur hanger. Pulled everything apart I mentioned and not a peep for the duration of the race. Although I think the headset is trashed, but I will get that fixed.

Try all of that and let me know how it goes, It can be challenging to find those strange noises, but you can get them all taken care of.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> Do not give up on this frame. It is probably not your bottom bracket, but here is a list of things I check whenever there is a strange noise.
> 1. I usually pull the cranks out first and clean then, apply a little grease and re assemble to factory specs.
> 2. Check your chain ring, make sure all is torqued to spec. Every now and then, pull it apart, clean all the mud/sand out and apply a small amount or grease.
> 3. Pedals - Pull them apart and grease the internals, also apply a bit of grease the threads where they go into the crank arms.
> ...


I forgot to mention one thing.
6. Clean and grease the through hub axles.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

LunchRider said:


> I forgot to mention one thing.
> 6. Clean and grease the through hub axles.


Just about to reply with that. LBS did my headset, seat post and BB (three times) and could not get rid of a creak. It was the axle/drop outs. Five minutes and a little grease finally fixed it.


----------



## likeaboss (Jan 1, 2012)

I have hundreds of miles on my 9.8 frame with the Wheels BB86/92 BB with no noise.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00FZL319G/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

vitorn said:


> Hey guys;
> Do any of you know where I can buy a 27.5 x [15x150 + 12x197] wheelset ??
> I want to change out my 26 set and ride a 3.8" tires with the above wheelset
> 
> Thank you


I have seen a few sets on fat bike trader on Facebook.


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

Aluminum frame weight anyone?


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

LunchRider said:


> I forgot to mention one thing.
> 6. Clean and grease the through hub axles.


I've been doing most, if not all of these, for months now. After I do the service, the creaking stops for about 2-3 rides and then comes back soon thereafter. I just did a thorough look through and lubing yesterday. There was no Creek sounds on this morning ride. I suspect it will start up again as it has in the past.

How often are you guys greasing and lubing the parts on the bike? Should I just expect to do it every 2 to 3 rides?


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

I've had my bike for a year, put over 3,000 miles on it and had to do it three times. 

I cannot stand creaking.


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

The Farley 5 still going like new! It's amazing how the M8000 set is still working without any adjustments. After driving Winter+Summer and now going back to winter. No adjustments...try to do that with the SRAM. Lol


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

RockyJo1 said:


> Aluminum frame weight anyone?


Trek aluminum frames are very light - if you need more than that you're a weight weenie - don't be one of those guys.


----------



## kryten (Mar 8, 2012)

Is there a geometry chart available somewhere for 2016 Farley 7? Trek archives only has spec sheet.


----------



## cborrman (Sep 23, 2008)

bberck said:


> Here is a picture of what happens. Chain seems to bounce to much.


check the chain is not too long and remove unnecessary links as well


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

kryten said:


> Is there a geometry chart available somewhere for 2016 Farley 7? Trek archives only has spec sheet.


The 2017 site should suffice. The Farley bikes are mostly unchanged.


----------



## Hobine (Jun 16, 2004)

Well my 29+ carbon wheels broke with right around 200 miles on them. Don't know how, just noticed the crack and bead delamination in the work stand. So I put on my planned winter wheels for today's ride. 26x4.5 Kendas on 80mm Mulfuts. They fit with the sliders all the way forward and seemed to ride pretty well, very different though than the 29 plus.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Hobine said:


> Well my 29+ carbon wheels broke with right around 200 miles on them. Don't know how, just noticed the crack and bead delamination in the work stand.


Broken carbon wheel, how unusual...


----------



## aquamogal (Aug 20, 2015)

I am looking to add a 27+ or 29+ wheel set to my 2016 farley 9.6 I am 5'6" in west Michigan. Anyone have experience with 50M rim and 27.5 X 3 
Racing Ralph or Rocket Ron ? Thanks


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

aquamogal said:


> I am looking to add a 27+ or 29+ wheel set to my 2016 farley 9.6 I am 5'6" in west Michigan. Anyone have experience with 50M rim and 27.5 X 3
> Racing Ralph or Rocket Ron ? Thanks


I am running 29+ on a Farley 9.6. I am running 52mm outside x 45mm inside rims with 3.0 Chupacbra tires. I think the rim width is an excellent match where it is not too wide exposing the tires sidewalls, but is wide enough to support the tire well at low pressures. I typically run 11psi front and 13psi rear.
Can't help with the 27.5 size nor the tire options you are considering.
I went with 29+ over 27.5+ as I didn't want to lower the bike and lower crank clearance resulting in more pedal strikes as I like to ride is some rocky areas where clearance is welcome. The 29+ versus the 27.5 fat is pretty close with 29+ be marginally taller.
BTW I really like the 29+ configuration for spring/summer/fall, but will go back to fat for the winter once the snow flies.


----------



## supercal20077 (Sep 7, 2010)

Well, cracked my front WAMPA last night, not happy about that. May be cheaper to build a set on Hugos for my Farley 9.8. BK


----------



## ForNow (Nov 10, 2014)

supercal20077 said:


> Well, cracked my front WAMPA last night, not happy about that. May be cheaper to build a set on Hugos for my Farley 9.8. BK


What are the details on how this happened? Equipment failure or operator error?


----------



## supercal20077 (Sep 7, 2010)

I was running 7 PSI, (I'm 147 lbs) and hit a root on a small downhill section. Cracked the rim right at the valve stem seam. Looks like I hit it at just the right angle, so operator error. I have dented Bontrager Aluminum wheels in the past, so obviously I ride kinda hard. I currently have Stans Valors on my Procaliber 9.8, so I may run a little more psi so this doesn't happen again. I am headed to the LBS today to find out about the Trek/Bontrager carbon accidents happens crash replacement and will update the issue. BK


----------



## PBL450 (Nov 3, 2015)

jpaa said:


> The Farley 5 still going like new! It's amazing how the M8000 set is still working without any adjustments. After driving Winter+Summer and now going back to winter. No adjustments...try to do that with the SRAM. Lol


My Farley 5 came with a mixed group, with some SRAM? Still going fine mind you, it sees some heavy duty and has seen plenty of salt water.


----------



## jmaddocks (Apr 15, 2007)

Stopped by my LBS today to look at a Farley 7 and 9.8...came home with a 7 as an early Christmas present.  It had been a long time since I'd gotten a new bike, so this was a real treat.

I've been riding and racing single speeds for the last ten years and plan to convert the Farley. In fact, I took the cassette (and hub driver) off about 10 minutes after getting home, at which point I realized the 11-speed XD driver will have to be swapped out with a 10-speed freehub in order to fit a SS cog with spacers.

*Question: will a Farley 5 freehub fit on the Farley 7's hub in place of the XD driver?*

TIA...


----------



## cborrman (Sep 23, 2008)

jmaddocks said:


> Stopped by my LBS today to look at a Farley 7 and 9.8...came home with a 7 as an early Christmas present.  It had been a long time since I'd gotten a new bike, so this was a real treat.
> 
> I've been riding and racing single speeds for the last ten years and plan to convert the Farley. In fact, I took the cassette (and hub driver) off about 10 minutes after getting home, at which point I realized the 11-speed XD driver will have to be swapped out with a 10-speed freehub in order to fit a SS cog with spacers.
> 
> ...


I had opposite question for a stache 5 recently and emailed trek UK RE getting an XD driver and got a part number response within a couple of hours


----------



## jmaddocks (Apr 15, 2007)

cborrman said:


> I had opposite question for a stache 5 recently and emailed trek UK RE getting an XD driver and got a part number response within a couple of hours


FWIW, I know the Stache 7 guys are using the Stache 5 freehub (Trek part #435903) to go SS, which would imply you can go the opposite direction (i.e., use the Stache 7 XD driver).

Edit: just re-read your post and realized you already solved your problem...  Hopefully my LBS will get back to me today.


----------



## CFH (Oct 27, 2015)

I just picked up a 9.8 and it should be here tomorrow. But the guy I bought it from put on a shimano drivetrain. If I wanted to go back to a sram cassette... what XD driver free hub do i need to get?


----------



## BlueCheesehead (Jul 17, 2010)

Anyone interested in an essentially new (<100mile) set of 2016 Farley 5 hubs? I bought the Farley wheelset for the Mulefut rims and laced in hubs to fit my Mukluk. If interested, shoot me a PM. I would be cool with $120 for front and back, shipped.


----------



## thedonk13 (Apr 26, 2016)

so i've done some searching...can anyone tell me the dimensions of the inner frame triangle? i'm trying to get some bags together so when my Farley 7 gets here i will be ready to ride....

i'm looking at the Revelate Ranger bags and would like to know....i've got a 19.5 farley 7 on the way (be here 10/26), got a smoking great deal on it...


----------



## jmaddocks (Apr 15, 2007)

LBS just called. The Shimano freehub which replaces the XD driver on a Farley 7 is Trek part #427334 (Bontrager Rhythm Comp/Elite freehub)...$100 (!!) from the dealer, but I found it for just over $60 shipped from the UK.


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

Brand new here and been really learning lots from you all! One thing I'm wondering about, on the Farley 5 was there a spare orange rim strip that came with it? I see photos of stock 5s with orange in the wheels.. mine are black. I'll probably be ordering an orange one once I figure out which tubeless method to use as the debate still seems all over the place.. I almost ordered the fattystrippers but now I'm not so sure.. I'll be switching tires for the summer so I need to figure out which method is most durable through tire changes..


----------



## BlueCheesehead (Jul 17, 2010)

Jabrnet said:


> Brand new here and been really learning lots from you all! One thing I'm wondering about, on the Farley 5 was there a spare orange rim strip that came with it? I see photos of stock 5s with orange in the wheels.. mine are black. I'll probably be ordering an orange one once I figure out which tubeless method to use as the debate still seems all over the place.. I almost ordered the fattystrippers but now I'm not so sure.. I'll be switching tires for the summer so I need to figure out which method is most durable through tire changes..


Welcome. The Fattystripper is NOT a one time solution. Mulefut rims are tubeless friendly. The SunRingle tape is said to be foolproof. I am using Zip Flashing which is available from Lowes. You will get enough to do 6 pairs of wheels for the same price as the SunRingle for one set of wheels, but it will require trimming.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yep, Zip System, or Forti-Flash or similar.
Sooner or later you'll see flashing tape of some sort re-branded as fat bike tubeless tape.
It makes shrink wrap and even the Sun tape obsolete, at least as far as TLR rims are concerned. Why anyone would go split-tube on a TLR rim is beyond me.


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

Anyone have a "how to" on using the flash tape? Preparation of the rim, how to trim it where/when, and what else is required? Your two posts are the first I've heard of this method!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

There's a guy who posted a Youtube video on Zip Tape.

Here's what I can tell you - have a helper so that one person can hold and rotate the wheel a few degrees at a time while you lay and PULL/stretch the tape as you apply it.
That way the tape is contracting against the rim, not just laying there relying only on it's adhesive, like Gorilla tape. Then burnish it down, especially around and under the bead shelf. I personally ran an Exacto blade underneath the bead shelf because I was worried about affecting how the tire seats. You may be able to trim up higher and leave the tape all the way up the inside wall of the Mulefut - but I didn't want to take the chance of the tire not seating as tightly. Thus the trimming.


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

I'll check that out thanks!

So far I've ordered a bunch of stuff, just waiting for it to be delivered! Wolftooth 30T oval, goat link, Sunrace 11-42 (I regret ordering this one...I got silver, should have gotten black, ) 800mm nukeproof low rise bar, Blackburn frame bag and handlebar bag and 2 anything racks for the fork. Still trying to decide on a seat pack but I've got time for that. I also ordered two new 26x4 Vee Rubber Vee8 120TPI tires (for $19 CAD each!) for next summer to haul along the chariot with my daughter in it using the axle adapter I got.... It's been a little bit if retail therapy this week to be honest... But I should be good now other than figuring out the Tubeless and playing around with the chain stay length for fun. Should be a good winter!


----------



## BlueCheesehead (Jul 17, 2010)

Gambit21 said:


> There's a guy who posted a Youtube video on Zip Tape.
> 
> Here's what I can tell you - have a helper so that one person can hold and rotate the wheel a few degrees at a time while you lay and PULL/stretch the tape as you apply it.


I agree with everything said except it is not necessary to have someone hold the wheel. Simply put the bare wheel in the frame or fork. The bike can be upside down or in a stand. Use something to hold the brake lever in to apply the brake to the rotor. I used a velcro strap. Rubber bands or a piece of wire would work. Now the wheel will not rotate and the zip flashing can be stretched tight. You can apply the flashing to 1/4 to 1/3 of the wheel before needing to release the brake to rotate the wheel.

I line up one side of the flashing with the bed of the rim where it meets the lip so that side does not need to be cut. I then cut the other side about 1/2 way up the lip. Once cut it will lay down into the bed of the rim near the lip. I then press it down and install a tube and tire pumped up to 20psi or so and leave it over night.

Rim can be cleaned with alcohol to remove any grease before applying tape.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Great idea with the brake lever, and lining up the tape so only one side has to be cut as well.

Oh, and I found it helped to clean with alcohol, then take some steel wool to it - pretty 'Teflon'ish' that first time and the tape didn't want to stick until I did this.


----------



## airborn22 (Nov 22, 2010)

*stem*



BikingDerek said:


> 9.8 Farley, picked it up this past Sunday, can't wait to take it on the trails.


That is a great looking bike, I bet it rides like a dream. What is the stock stem length? As I understand it the stem is the only none carbon component on the 9.8.


----------



## Up North Eh (Apr 14, 2016)

I have a 2016 Farley9 with Jackelope rims/Bluto up front. Can anyone advise if I can go bigger tire wise than the 3.8 Hodags. LBS says I need to change rims to 26" to get anything bigger to work with Bluto. I'm just wondering if any of 4" tires might work. Thanks.


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

Gambit21 said:


> There's a guy who posted a Youtube video on Zip Tape.
> 
> Here's what I can tell you - have a helper so that one person can hold and rotate the wheel a few degrees at a time while you lay and PULL/stretch the tape as you apply it.
> That way the tape is contracting against the rim, not just laying there relying only on it's adhesive, like Gorilla tape. Then burnish it down, especially around and under the bead shelf. I personally ran an Exacto blade underneath the bead shelf because I was worried about affecting how the tire seats. You may be able to trim up higher and leave the tape all the way up the inside wall of the Mulefut - but I didn't want to take the chance of the tire not seating as tightly. Thus the trimming.


Thanks, I found some local stuff that looks to be the same as the zip tape so I'll be setting this up soon. Looking for a matte orange rim strip but there have been none in the 60mm other than the black ones from sun-ringle for the 80mm Mulefüt. Surly has them but they say for a 82mm rim to use the 50mm nylon strip... Is there a minimum or maximum width to use for the rim strip?


----------



## BlueCheesehead (Jul 17, 2010)

Jabrnet said:


> Thanks, I found some local stuff that looks to be the same as the zip tape so I'll be setting this up soon. Looking for a matte orange rim strip but there have been none in the 60mm other than the black ones from sun-ringle for the 80mm Mulefüt. Surly has them but they say for a 82mm rim to use the 50mm nylon strip... Is there a minimum or maximum width to use for the rim strip?


For tubeless you only need about 5mm lap on each side of the cutout as the tape will hold it in place. It is common to cut the rim strip to the desired width. This is easy to do. With the bike upside down, or in a repair stand, install the wheel with the rim strip (no tire) on the frame. You can rotate the wheel with one hand hold a utility or exacto knife with the other hand to cut the rim strip. Similar procedure as cutting the Zip flashing tape.

Once you are done cutting the rim strip you are ready to clean the rim and install the flashing tape.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

I dunno, I used Sunringle's tape and haven't had to mess with it once. It was the exact width, no stretching, just lay it down and away you go. And I've swapped from Barbegazis to Bud/Nate and back multiple times. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ChargeCookerMaxi (Oct 25, 2015)

So I'm going to buy some of the 9.6 wheels for my Surly ICT. I need to switch the XD freehub driver for a Shimano driver. Does anyone know where I can find the correct driver for the Jackalope hub?


----------



## rideeatrepeat (Mar 11, 2008)

Any side view pictures of the XL bikes in aluminum to see ??
I can get a smoking deal on a Scott Big Jon but jeezzz the stand over is 34" on the XL!!!
Seriously, 2016 and they still make stand over that high on a mtn bike?!?!? 
Trek seems to have the lowest stand over I've found but if you know of any others Id sure like to compare.
I'd be looking to get the Farley 5


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

I searched around and some have done a 2x to 1x conversion on the Farley, what I don't see is what is needed to do the conversion? I ordered a WT RaceFace Reverse Dish Elliptical 30t ring and trying to find instruction online about how to do it.. Am I right in assuming that with removing 2 chainrings and replacing with 1 on the Cinch system I need some sort of spacers? 

Edit: I just went out to the bike and found that there is a spider on it... Not the Cinch crank.... Balls... I just got the bike and had just used the spec page to order my chainring... Only problem is, I was using the spec page for the other bike I was considering that has a cinch crank...... Stupid stupid stupid...

So, I tried to use every crank pulling tool I have and nothing works... I hate.not having the right tools....

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## os2 (Jan 22, 2004)

rideeatrepeat said:


> Any side view pictures of the XL bikes in aluminum to see ??


Here's a side pic of a 2016 Farley 7 in XL


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

Ranger Pride said:


> I had my shop put the Aeffect crankset on my Farley 5. It uses the same bottom bracket. Well worth the swap.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Do you know what model exactly of Aeffect crankset it was? And you are certain they did not change the bottom bracket? I'm looking to do this change which would allow me to use my chainring I bought and also help with my bad knee... Are there any issues with it so far now that you've ridden it lots?

I've always had trouble with figuring out bottom brackets... They seem to be a tightly kept secret or something... All most manufacturers say the bottom bracket in their bikes is something like press fit and that's it.. if I see correctly, the Farley 5 has a pf121 BB as does the 7. So I guess the aeffect for fat bikes in a 170 with 175mm crank arms "should" work.

thanks!

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## PBL450 (Nov 3, 2015)

os2 said:


> Here's a side pic of a 2016 Farley 7 in XL


That is GREAT looking bike. Just great. And I love my 5...


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

Jabrnet said:


> Do you know what model exactly of Aeffect crankset it was? And you are certain they did not change the bottom bracket? I'm looking to do this change which would allow me to use my chainring I bought and also help with my bad knee... Are there any issues with it so far now that you've ridden it lots?
> 
> I've always had trouble with figuring out bottom brackets... They seem to be a tightly kept secret or something... All most manufacturers say the bottom bracket in their bikes is something like press fit and that's it.. if I see correctly, the Farley 5 has a pf121 BB as does the 7. So I guess the aeffect for fat bikes in a 170 with 175mm crank arms "should" work.
> 
> ...


There's nothing that hard to figure out with bottom brackets at all for common bikes. Boutique stuff can get a bit different

Their threaded or press fit (they have their stupid letter and number designations but it's one or the other)

Then it's either 24mm, 30mm or sram funky spindles. Shimano and race face all use 24mm until you hit their more expensive cinch cranks. We're leaving out all the square taper, power spline and Isis crap of old. It doesn't apply unless an older or cheap entry bike anymore.

Finally you have spindle length. There is only 2 for fat bikes anymore. 170mm and 190mm. Bottom brackets for race face are all the same, 24mm for race face ride and affect and 30mm for turbine on up cinch cranksets.

You can actually use shimano bottom bracket cups (for 63/73 standard MTB) in place of the race face bottom bracket bearing cups. I know cause I've been riding for 3 months that way.

Race face aeffect uses cinch direct drive style rings but since it uses the smaller spindle they don't list it as cinch system. Just direct drive.

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk


----------



## vtwin650 (Apr 18, 2013)

It's not a 2016 but it belongs here. My new Farley 9.6. My Stache eased the transition lol.


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

tigris99 said:


> There's nothing that hard to figure out with bottom brackets at all for common bikes. Boutique stuff can get a bit different
> 
> Their threaded or press fit (they have their stupid letter and number designations but it's one or the other)
> 
> ...


Ok great, so now I just need someone who's actually used the Aeffect 170 spacing crank on the Farley 5 to confirm it works and was there anything else they needed to use like spacers or something that I as someone who's never changed a crank before needs to know about.

The wolftooth elliptical 30t I have is the reverse dish, so that should take care of the chain line I believe.

Would there be a danger of my chainring hitting the chainstay if I use said reverse dish 30t elliptical ring? After reading through the last 100 pages, I thought I read something about that somewhere...

I'm sorry for all the questions but this seems to be the only place who's talked about the Aeffect 170mm spacing crank on the Farley 5 and I need to order this online and take a half a day to go get it in the states so I want to be sure everything is right.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## thedonk13 (Apr 26, 2016)

I want to get a good seat bag for the Farley 7 (it's a 19.5 btw), and i've read that some have issues with rubbing due to the nature of the farley. Does anyone know if the Revelate Designs Terrapin System will work with this beast of a bike?


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

Jabrnet said:


> Ok great, so now I just need someone who's actually used the Aeffect 170 spacing crank on the Farley 5 to confirm it works and was there anything else they needed to use like spacers or something that I as someone who's never changed a crank before needs to know about.
> 
> The wolftooth elliptical 30t I have is the reverse dish, so that should take care of the chain line I believe.
> 
> ...


I reached out to Trek to confirm and they confirmed the 170 spacing version works with the Farley 5 so I ordered it. Thanks for the replies I got and advice. Soon I'll be rolling 1x10 hopefully!

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

vtwin650 said:


> It's not a 2016 but it belongs here. My new Farley 9.6. My Stache eased the transition lol.


Nice man! I'm trying to decide if I'm going to sell my 2016 7 to upgrade to the 2017 9.6


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Jabrnet said:


> I reached out to Trek to confirm and they confirmed the 170 spacing version works with the Farley 5 so I ordered it. Thanks for the replies I got and advice. Soon I'll be rolling 1x10 hopefully!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


It works. I am using those cranks on my Farley 5. Invert the chainring and you're good. I can send a pic when I get home if you'd like

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

hoboscratch said:


> It works. I am using those cranks on my Farley 5. Invert the chainring and you're good. I can send a pic when I get home if you'd like
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's what I was looking for thanks! There was lots of people saying it should work but I didn't find anyone saying they had done it. I just got an email from RaceFace too finally but they recommended I use the Turbine or Next crank and change the BB... (In other words spend more money) but from what I see the aeffect should do me just fine.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## bikeny (Feb 26, 2004)

thedonk13 said:


> I want to get a good seat bag for the Farley 7 (it's a 19.5 btw), and i've read that some have issues with rubbing due to the nature of the farley. Does anyone know if the Revelate Designs Terrapin System will work with this beast of a bike?


All depends on your seat height. Look here:

Choosing the Right Seat Bag | Revelate Designs LLC

My guess is with a 19.5" frame you should be fine.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

bikeny said:


> All depends on your seat height. Look here:
> 
> Choosing the Right Seat Bag | Revelate Designs LLC
> 
> My guess is with a 19.5" frame you should be fine.


Yah... i have a 19.5" and my seats sky high. No issues with a bag.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Jabrnet said:


> That's what I was looking for thanks! There was lots of people saying it should work but I didn't find anyone saying they had done it. I just got an email from RaceFace too finally but they recommended I use the Turbine or Next crank and change the BB... (In other words spend more money) but from what I see the aeffect should do me just fine.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


Yeah, I just took aeffect takeoffs from a Farley 7 or something, and used the spindle that came with those cranks. Didn't change BB. Just flip the cinch chainring and you'll be good. Was an awesome upgrade

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chedeng88 (Sep 19, 2016)

Farley experts,

I'm looking for this "Y" shaped plastic spacer piece used in the Stranglehold dropout. What do you call this part and where can I buy it? I just noticed that the used Farley 9.6 I bought doesn't have it.

Do you really need this piece, or do you only use this when you want the dropouts at extremes front or back settings?

My local Trek store is clueless about it.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

Chedeng88 said:


> Farley experts,
> 
> I'm looking for this "Y" shaped plastic spacer piece used in the Stranglehold dropout. What do you call this part and where can I buy it? I just noticed that the used Farley 9.6 I bought doesn't have it.
> 
> ...


The part is not required it is used when they set the bike up!! you remove this part to adjust your chain-stay length


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Yep I ditched mine when I moved mine forward right after I got it. Completely unnecessary. My LBS said as much when I was getting the bike set up for me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chedeng88 (Sep 19, 2016)

Thanks for the info guys! I appreciate it!


----------



## Surly in OZ (Aug 2, 2011)

*New Farley 5...*

Hi everyone, after reading through most of this thread over the last few weeks a Farley seemed a great idea. Originally looking at a Wednesday but reading these pages changed my mind.

Well I picked it up this afternoon, first shock how light it is, even with tubes in the tyres. Tubeless will happen next week.

Head home to add pedals and change the seat and grips. the pedals are Crank Brothers Stamps in the large size. As someone with a US 13/Euro 48 these pedals are fantastic.









The seat is a Brooks Cambium C17 Carved, one of those things that you like or not.

















The grips an set of Egrons with bar ends, not cool but comfortable.

















With daylight running out I headed to the trails at the end of my street. I had thought that these would be about the worst type for a fat bike, lots of tight twists and turns. Always something to break the flow and short sharp climbs.

Well after I stopped laughing and grinning I realised this bike kills it.

Even thought I could feel the front tyre pressure was to high it still turned and climbed like a Goat. And once up to speed it rolled over everything. Can only see this getting better tubeless and with the PSI shorted.

Way more fun than I expected. What a great bike.


----------



## fishboy316 (Jan 10, 2014)

They are a great bike! Trek Nailed the fat bike with the Farley! I LOVE my 7. It is my go to bike now. Light, agile and fast! What else do you need! I am actually thinking about an EX next year if the back does not start acting right. 

Enjoy the new bike!


----------



## Red_Label (Sep 2, 2008)

Got a flat on my rear tire of my Farley 9.6 while night riding during the super moon a few nights ago. Was a slow leak, so I made it home. Tried to remove the Hodag tire so I could patch the tube (or slime it). No such luck. That tire is STUCK on there good. Scratched the edge of my Jackalope rim. So I'm taking both wheels to a local shop today to have them convert to tubeless. I had planned to get a set of Barbegazis for the winter, but I think I'll make do with the Hodags at lower pressure.


----------



## jmaddocks (Apr 15, 2007)

Congrats, Surly!


----------



## Picard (Apr 5, 2005)

What is the weight of Farley 9.6 carbon bike? 

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## ChargeCookerMaxi (Oct 25, 2015)

Picard said:


> What is the weight of Farley 9.6 carbon bike?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk


27.5 lbs


----------



## Surly in OZ (Aug 2, 2011)

jmaddocks said:


> Congrats, Surly!


Thanks mate, after a few rides this week on my normal trails, the Farley is bringing a stupid grin to my face every time.

I have set many PB's and I still have not found the limits of the tyres grip. Long time since I have found myself laughing out loud as I fly out of a corner.

Some of the PB's have been on climb's which was a suprise, as I still have tubes in and can really feel the weight.

After only a few rides the Farley has proven to be a great ride.


----------



## jmaddocks (Apr 15, 2007)

Surly in OZ said:


> Thanks mate, after a few rides this week on my normal trails, the Farley is bringing a stupid grin to my face every time.


I rode my Farley 7 for the first time as a singlespeed (28x16) earlier this week. I think I've successfully dialed in the tire pressure and my riding style. Pretty cool being able to just bunny hop some of the rock gardens. I'm sure I had the same stupid grin on my face the whole ride.


----------



## Litemike (Sep 13, 2007)

Picked up a Silver grey 9.8 19.5" 2017 model - set up tubeless and xtr spd's = 25.2 lbs. Tubes weighed 430 grams each. Pretty much fun to ride, but I took it a little too hard the first few days, riding like an xc racer over everything! I'm a bit sore!


----------



## RLJ676 (Aug 8, 2011)

Just bought a 2016 Farley 5, haven't even gotten it home as it's getting tubeless setup as soon as the tape is in. Only thing I'm not excited about is the non CF fork, anyone have a takeoff one they want to sell PM me.

Also, anyone know if these will work for the hubs, or know another way to convert to through axle? Great deals on mountain bike and bmx wheels from WMS

Why did I buy a 5 and not a 7 if I want through axle/CF fork? Looks/resale of the matte gray vs purple (if I ride in winter on this enough I could seeing a total upgrade). Also, I wanted a Shimano driveline, I have the GX on my other ride (SC 5010). If I want 1x I can get a sunrace 11-42 rear and a 30 and be good, but thinking for all the spinning in snow a 2x might be best, I'll find out. In my mind I still have some dough to spend and come in less than the 7 and have what I want, bought for $1250 on closeout, vs $1750 for the 7.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I liked the grey and orange, but after doing all the math I ended up getting the 7 - just made sense.
Was $2200 at the time. Upgraded to a carbon bar and XT brakes.
The purple grew on me and now I wouldn't trade it. My wife has the 5 - upgraded to XT drive train, and will put LX brakes on there eventually. Those Avids are boat anchors.

When I ride them back to back, the 7 is noticeably snappier and lighter than the 5.
Not sure how much of that is the fork.


----------



## Surly in OZ (Aug 2, 2011)

Hi RLJ welcome to the club. My Farley 5 is a week old and already I am trying to think of reasons to keep my other mountain bikes.

I too was thinking about a 1x upgrade, but after a 40km ride on the weekend the 36/22 combo works well on my trails.

Would not worry too much about a fork swap as once you get the tubes out the bike will feel much lighter.

And the price you got it for makes it a steal.


----------



## Surly in OZ (Aug 2, 2011)

*One bike to rule them all...*

Hi everyone, after a week of riding I am starting to believe that the Farley is going to be my go to bike. So much that I am already thinking of selling my other mountain bikes.

I am not the most skilled rider, fit yes but timid when it comes to rough trails. Always in the back of my mind that I have to go to work on Monday's.

The grip these tyres give is incredible, I am setting P/B's all over the place. Not just down hill but up as well.

Just after I took this picture...









and was coming back onto the trail a bunch of riders came along and carrying speed from the down hill they came past. I did not want to get in their way so I let them pass.

As they started the climb up I followed, straight away the last rider lost traction on his 29er, I slowed to follow and as he went again he spun out. So I get out of the saddle and with no slip at all fly past him and the other riders in his group.

These were fit guy's on some very nice F/S bikes. As I rounded up the fastest guy he said he could here something coming up behind he just did not know what. I said in jest it was a tractor 

A fatbike might not be for everyone or their trails or riding type, but I am 100% sold.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Surly in OZ said:


> Would not worry too much about a fork swap as once you get the tubes out the bike will feel much lighter.
> .


Like I just said, my 7 is noticeably different...lighter, more agile feeling than my wife's 5 - both are tubeless. I converted her 5 to XT 1x too, so the difference can't be attributed to the weight of the drive train.


----------



## nismosr (Feb 20, 2004)

Buddy of mine just took home a 9.6 ..


----------



## RLJ676 (Aug 8, 2011)

Gambit21 said:


> I liked the grey and orange, but after doing all the math I ended up getting the 7 - just made sense.
> Was $2200 at the time. Upgraded to a carbon bar and XT brakes.
> The purple grew on me and now I wouldn't trade it. My wife has the 5 - upgraded to XT drive train, and will put LX brakes on there eventually. Those Avids are boat anchors.
> 
> ...


Are you using for snow or on dirt? I'm thinking for slower speed, "boring" groomed snow the difference won't matter. As soon as summer rolls around I'm back on the Santa Cruz haha. It'll also be a donor for parts as I upgrade it, Guide brakes, maybe the GX drivetrain, etc. The raceface bars and stem are already off it.

I found a cheap way to do a carbon fork though, angleset and a On-One or Specialized fork, angleset brings geometry back to stock w/ a shorter fork. Will certainly alter handling a tiny bit, but I'd assume not noticeable for snow.



Surly in OZ said:


> Hi RLJ welcome to the club. My Farley 5 is a week old and already I am trying to think of reasons to keep my other mountain bikes.
> 
> I too was thinking about a 1x upgrade, but after a 40km ride on the weekend the 36/22 combo works well on my trails.
> 
> ...


I think I need to just ride in snow and see about the fork, but I think I have the "cheap plan" to upgrade if I want.

Now just to find pedals, etc for "cheap" as this is the "winter beater", but I sure feel excited about it for that lol!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

RLJ676 said:


> Are you using for snow or on dirt? I'm thinking for slower speed, "boring" groomed snow the difference won't matter.


Won't matter in your case 
I'm talking about when I really jump on it in harder conditions and do a manual, or accelerate hard, etc.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Winter has arrived and I am loving the Farley 7. Plan to do a lot of singletrack riding this winter and looking at studded tires.

Was about to buy Dillinger 4 studded for a fast rolling tire (similar to the Barbi's but with studs).

I hear the Dillingers are not great in soft / fresh snow due to smaller lugs, so I have asked some of the local dealers. Most say Dillinger but all agree not the greatest for soft snow. Two are personally running Dillinger in front and Bontrager Gnarwhal studded in the rear. Gnarwhal has decent rolling resistance with bigger lugs for soft snow grip. They are a 3.8" tire but may be the ticket for a great all-round setup for Canada West. Thoughts?


----------



## Up North Eh (Apr 14, 2016)

Word from my Trek Dealers is Gnarwhal 27.5 x 4.5 is on way, with studs and without.


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

What about a 26" x 4.5????

Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk


----------



## tmbrown (Jun 9, 2007)

The Farley 7 has 26" tires, a lot more choices, I demoed a 9.8 today and while I was at the dealer, I had him look up the Gnarwhal 27.5 x 4.5, they showed up on his screen at Trek but, none were available, the 26 x 3.8 were available but, I didn’t notice a listing for studs on either size, I was more interested about the tire choices for 27.5" than 26" though.

What's the verdict on the Wampa carbon rims that come on the Farley 9.8 ? are they durable, or should I pick up a 9.6 and have a set of 26" Nextie's built up, I can get 20% off on either bike.


----------



## Surly in OZ (Aug 2, 2011)

*A few from yesterday.*

Hi everyone a few images from my Farley's first beach ride.

























Was not sure how it would handle the soft sand, but it just rolled over all but the softest parts. A few of the trails leading over the hills were steep and full of rock ledges, with the tyres still aired down it climbed like a goat.

I thought that I would like a fatbike, just not this much.


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

tigris99 said:


> What about a 26" x 4.5????
> 
> Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk


http://45nrth.com/products/tires/wrathchild

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

I threw this together. 26" studded tires:

I want a fast rolling studded tire similar to the Barbis. 
Front : Dill4
Rear: Gnarwhal or Dill4

Anyone run the Gnarwhal yet?


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Weights measured with packaging:
Bontrager Gnarwhal: 1370g $275CDN
Dillinger 4 120tpi : 1452g $299CDN
Dillinger 4 60tpi : 1531g $239CDN

(I read in another post the Dill4 120tpi hovered around 1370g. Packaging must be crazy heavy)


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

geop said:


> I threw this together. 26" studded tires:
> 
> I want a fast rolling studded tire similar to the Barbis.
> Front : Dill4
> ...


I run a gnarwhal rear and snowshoe xl front.

Its a good tire, will be slower than a dill 4 but has lots of bite. Been compared to a nate. It was a bit narrow like 3.8" at first but seems to have stretched out a bit.


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

Farley 5....my Global Fatbike Day...


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Has anyone used one of those Enduro Torqlite bottom brackets that are suppose to eliminate the problems inherent with press fit bottom brackets? I can't tell if they even offer one that fits the farley 9.6 and 9.8 frame. 

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

I've never been a "trek guy" per se.. but when I started reading up on the Farley and its features; it ticks every single box for me.

Just got this photo from the bike shop that my 9.9 has arrived.
Pick it up on Saturday - can't wait to try out the XX1 Eagle drivetrain!
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:


----------



## headwind (Sep 30, 2004)

Suspension fork for the Farley 7.
I am ignorant to what will work and what won't.
Will any forks fit a 5 inch tire? I'm running the Snowshoe 2XL's right now and I'd like to keep this combo for winter.
Bluto? I guess the tapered version will fit the Farley?


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

My buddy at the shop has been txting me pics as they build it... it is going to be a long two days wait! 





































Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> Like I just said, my 7 is noticeably different...lighter, more agile feeling than my wife's 5 - both are tubeless. I converted her 5 to XT 1x too, so the difference can't be attributed to the weight of the drive train.


Stock fork on the 5 weighs a ton.


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

Everything but pedals (19.5 frame)


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Geek said:


> Everything but pedals (19.5 frame)
> 
> DOOD!!!!!!


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

ikr?!?!! lol


----------



## hoboscratch (Apr 26, 2005)

Geek said:


> ikr?!?!! lol


Wow. Nice!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FT251 (Dec 7, 2014)

She is a beauty


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

I currently ride a Salsa Carbon Beargrease with a RCT3 Bluto and Whisky Carbon rims built with I9. I switch to the carbon rigid fork once we hit the snowy season. It's been a great bike. My question to you newer Farley owners running the 27.5 x 4.5 is how it compares to 26 x 4 both in snow and non-snow. What's the differences you feel riding? I'm 6' 2" for reference and I'm thinking that the overall size increase would have some advantages especially for taller riders. Thanks in advance for the feedback.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

Beautiful bike and I am really interested to here your opinion of of the 27.5 wheels



Geek said:


> Everything but pedals (19.5 frame)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

I'll let you know how it works out. :thumbsup:
I live at 8000ft so they'll definitely get put through their paces in the snow. :cornut:


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

Going to give these magnesium pedals a try.. they are half the weight of the spanks I run on my Yeti.

Has anyone else tried these on their Farley?










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Paochow (Jul 23, 2014)

Geek said:


> Going to give these magnesium pedals a try.. they are half the weight of the spanks I run on my Yeti.
> 
> Has anyone else tried these on their Farley?
> 
> ...


I've run them on a few bikes now- they are very light and have average grip. They have the durability of cheese though. I've ripped out pins with pedal strikes on smooth dirt, so you definitely need to watch your pedal strokes. Only pedal I've ever ripped pins out of.


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

Picked it up today. My brain has not quite digested how light it is vs how it looks... the two contradict so much.

I'm in love. 



















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LewisQC (Jul 3, 2013)

Rideon said:


> I currently ride a Salsa Carbon Beargrease with a RCT3 Bluto and Whisky Carbon rims built with I9. I switch to the carbon rigid fork once we hit the snowy season. It's been a great bike. My question to you newer Farley owners running the 27.5 x 4.5 is how it compares to 26 x 4 both in snow and non-snow. What's the differences you feel riding? I'm 6' 2" for reference and I'm thinking that the overall size increase would have some advantages especially for taller riders. Thanks in advance for the feedback.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Also curious about 27.5 x 4.5 on snow vs 4.8 x 26


----------



## SLC_Specialized (Oct 8, 2005)

Any recommendations for a Frame Bag to fit an XL Farley 9.8?


----------



## DAVID J (Feb 25, 2004)

I went from 26/4.8 to 27.5/4.5. I have about 100 miles on the 27.5's in mixed conditions. Bare ground to 8"-10" on top of crust. I find the 27's to climb great, corner great, just do everything better. I've taken some long pulls thru fresh snow and they just keep on driving . Let the next couple guys thru on 26's and they've crapped right out. 
Bare ground not a huge difference but no draw backs either.


----------



## indyfab25 (Feb 10, 2004)

DAVID J said:


> I went from 26/4.8 to 27.5/4.5. I have about 100 miles on the 27.5's in mixed conditions. Bare ground to 8"-10" on top of crust. I find the 27's to climb great, corner great, just do everything better. I've taken some long pulls thru fresh snow and they just keep on driving . Let the next couple guys thru on 26's and they've crapped right out.
> Bare ground not a huge difference but no draw backs either.


This is my experience as well. 27.5x4.5 is incredible. The Gnarwhal is going to be a monster truck in the snow.


----------



## Gonzo 1971 (Apr 9, 2013)

2016 Farley 5. What brakes come on the bike stock? I just picked up a used one and the brakes took a crap in one ride...


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Gonzo 1971 said:


> 2016 Farley 5. What brakes come on the bike stock? I just picked up a used one and the brakes took a crap in one ride...


Google is your friend

2016 Farley 5 - Bike Archive - Trek Bicycle

Brakeset

Sram DB1 hydraulic disc

I have the DB3's on my Farley 7 and they are pretty bad. Mushy mess in winter conditions despite 2 attempts by my LBS to fix them/


----------



## prj71 (Dec 29, 2014)

Geek said:


> Going to give these magnesium pedals a try.. they are half the weight of the spanks I run on my Yeti.
> 
> Has anyone else tried these on their Farley?
> 
> ...


I have those pedals on my plus bike. Not one problem with them yet. They took a beating on some rocks and root via pedal strikes and some wipe outs this past summer and I never lost any pins and they never bent. Maybe Paochow had loose pins on his???


----------



## Gonzo 1971 (Apr 9, 2013)

I googled. It kept saying shimano. I did not find the trek archive. Thanks!


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

Anyone happen to be running a TMARS Mountain Bike Dropper Seatpost? Looking for a mechanical dropper that won't break the bank.. the 445mm version in a 31.6 is $99 on Amazon. Looking for real world experience. I have an eten remote on my superfly that is great, hoping I'd like this one just as much! I can't find much on max insertion only the 100mm min... I run my current post with 180mm inserted but the stock post is 400mm, this dropper is 445mm so I'd need to run 225mm inserted. Not sure if that.works or not...

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## Goldigger (Nov 6, 2009)

Has anybody got the Farley 9? Any issues with it?
Seems like a good spec, just needs a dropper post.
Have seen it for a good deal and tempted to hit the buy button.


----------



## daver38 (Nov 26, 2015)

Can anyone confirm whether the 27 x 4.5 Berbegazi tyres will fit in a bluto, scant info around.....some of the EX owners claim they do and some say they don't??


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

The barbegazi will fit the bluto and ex for a week or so then the stretch is too much and rubs.


----------



## fishboy316 (Jan 10, 2014)

My 100mm bluto says 27.5x3.8 max. May fit a 4" but looks like it is true 3.8 
from what I see.


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

I have an ex 27x4 would fit great but the 4.5 is to much. 29x3 works great as well on the bluto.


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

27.5+Fox works with the 27.5 3.8 Hodag 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## punchy712 (Jan 20, 2017)

I recently picked up a 2016 Farley 7 and I'm trying to setup the stock wheels/tires (Barbegazi on Mulefut) to tubless, mostly following this writeup: Tubeless Fatbike Conversion Update | Cycles In Life

I added the Sunring rim strip, taped it with the Scotch Tough Duct tape end to end (the best I could, I'm not sure how crucial it is to go to the absolute edge of the rim, under the lip). I put the tire on, sprayed it with some soapy water and pumped up the tire with my compressor to about 20-22psi to set the bead. It looks like the bead is set (tire also popped a few times), however there's air leaks on the rim around each square hole (sorry, not sure what these are called) and in a couple of spots around the bead.

Is this rim/tire combo supposed to be able to hold air without any sealant, or am I just expecting too much here and this is what the sealant's supposed to do? I'd just like to double check with others that have more experience before I start adding sealant and make a mess of it.


----------



## travisjgood (Apr 30, 2012)

Yes, you need sealant. I am using orange seal sealant and it works great.


----------



## hilltopcrew (Jun 30, 2010)

Geek said:


> Everything but pedals (19.5 frame)


Sick bike. There is only about 1.5 pounds that you could take out of the bike without changing the tires or wheels, reasonably that is.


----------



## TitanofChaos (Jun 13, 2011)

Goldigger said:


> Has anybody got the Farley 9? Any issues with it?
> Seems like a good spec, just needs a dropper post.
> Have seen it for a good deal and tempted to hit the buy button.


I have the 9, my favorite bike by far and my 4th fatbike

The bluto still isn't a great fork but it's what we've got, if RS makes a fat pike or fox makes a fat fork, I'll be swapping, no mechanical problems with the fork, I'd just prefer a 120 and something more plush, the bluto is more like an xc fork and the farley begs to hit things harder than that


----------



## punchy712 (Jan 20, 2017)

travisjgood said:


> Yes, you need sealant. I am using orange seal sealant and it works great.


Thanks for confirming. I'll be using the orange seal sealant as well, so hopefully it'll hold.

One more question about the tubeless setup. Stock wheels as they come from Trek with tubes, also have a rim strip installed. As far as I can tell, this isn't the same as the Sunringle rim strip that's recommended for the Mulefut tubless setup. For those of you that went tubeless, did you remove the stock/Trek rim strip and use the Sunringle one, did you simply use the stock rim strip, or did you put the Sunringle one on top of the existing rim strip?

Currently I added the Sunringle rimstrip on top of the existing rim strip, but I'm starting to wonder if that's causing sealing issues.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

4" wide duct tape over the existing rim strip (after de-greasing the rims) - no problems for >12 months and 1000 miles.

It bothers me a bit that you are getting some leakage through the rim cut-outs. IMHO you may not have done a good enough job of taping. The tape needs to go the full width of the rim, and right into the corner of the bead seat without any creases. (A bit of air leakage around the tyre bead is probably normal, but IME the Barbegazis sealed up really tight).

I'd remove the tyre and make sure that the tape is well stuck down and not creased, etc. Once you've got sealant in there the tape will never stick.


----------



## punchy712 (Jan 20, 2017)

Misterg said:


> 4" wide duct tape over the existing rim strip (after de-greasing the rims) - no problems for >12 months and 1000 miles.
> 
> It bothers me a bit that you are getting some leakage through the rim cut-outs. IMHO you may not have done a good enough job of taping. The tape needs to go the full width of the rim, and right into the corner of the bead seat without any creases. (A bit of air leakage around the tyre bead is probably normal, but IME the Barbegazis sealed up really tight).
> 
> I'd remove the tyre and make sure that the tape is well stuck down and not creased, etc. Once you've got sealant in there the tape will never stick.


I have the same worry as you, that I haven't taped it properly. I've only done one wheel so far, so tonight I'll do the other wheel following your advice... pull the tube, clean the wheel, leave the stock rim strip and not add the Sunringle one, and then add tape, this time I'll make sure it goes right into the corner.

Thanks for the advice.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

Or just put Stan's in it and see if it holds. I poked a hole right through the rim strip with a stick and it sealed. And my D5s hissed like crazy out two different stud pockets and they sealed up.


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

TitanofChaos said:


> I have the 9, my favorite bike by far and my 4th fatbike
> 
> The bluto still isn't a great fork but it's what we've got, if RS makes a fat pike or fox makes a fat fork, I'll be swapping, no mechanical problems with the fork, I'd just prefer a 120 and something more plush, the bluto is more like an xc fork and the farley begs to hit things harder than that


Sounds like the Wren fork is calling your name

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## schnee (Oct 15, 2005)

I had a line on a Mukluk Carbon frameset, and now that may not make it to me because, well, Salsa fulfillment strikes again.

I'm looking at the Trek Farley 9.9 carbon frameset. I'm a Clyde. I've heard these frames are really stiff and overbuilt, despite looking really sleek. Which is good, because I'm looking for a trail bike I can trust in some pretty rocky and rough terrain.

But, I've heard a few people complaining about creaking. I've had these issues on previous bikes (a Niner EMD9 with a really loud bottom bracket) so that sort of thing really puts me off.

So...is the Farley Carbon clydesdale-worthy? How prevalent are creaks and noises?

Thanks in advance for any help.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

schnee said:


> I had a line on a Mukluk Carbon frameset, and now that may not make it to me because, well, Salsa fulfillment strikes again.
> 
> I'm looking at the Trek Farley 9.9 carbon frameset. I'm a Clyde. I've heard these frames are really stiff and overbuilt, despite looking really sleek. Which is good, because I'm looking for a trail bike I can trust in some pretty rocky and rough terrain.
> 
> ...


I'm a Clyde and posted earlier in the thread about bottom bracket creaks. It turned out that the aluminum crank spacers were the cause. Once I swapped those for plastic ones, not a peep from my 9.8. I have never had any other creaks and none from the frame.

It's rock solid and I would definitely recommend it.

Sent from my Z983 using Tapatalk


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

schnee said:


> I had a line on a Mukluk Carbon frameset, and now that may not make it to me because, well, Salsa fulfillment strikes again.
> 
> I'm looking at the Trek Farley 9.9 carbon frameset. I'm a Clyde. I've heard these frames are really stiff and overbuilt, despite looking really sleek. Which is good, because I'm looking for a trail bike I can trust in some pretty rocky and rough terrain.
> 
> ...


I have a 2016 9.8 and am about 275lbs and it has survived me so far. I love this bike. As for the creaks and noises, I really don't know. I'm in my own little world when I ride and really don't pay attention.


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

@schnee
I'm a Clyde as well and my 9.9 is quiet (although I've only had it a month thus far).

I Love it! ...but I fear it is spoiling me. I picked up my Yeti yesterday to put it on my lift and was disappointed in how heavy it feels.   

Have you looked to see if your dealer can get you one? I'd heard a rumor that they were sold out of certain sizes until August.


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

So after riding my two Farley 14's since Nov of 13 I've finally found a Orange 17 Farley 9.6. The number one reason I wanted the 9.6 is color and I wanted to try the 27.5 wheels.



















Since most of the parts are coming off the bike to be sold or to go on one the other two Farley's. I will be collecting new parts and redoing the 27.5 rims this week. The 27.5 will be the 2nd set of wheels for this bike as I may be moving my 26" HED carbon wheels to this bike. It all depends on how much I like 27.5 vs 26".

Here is a comparison so you can see the size difference of the new wheels vs a set of 26" hodags.










Went to the Chicago Bike swap and picked up a few parts for the bike



















And of course I've ordered a few parts to complete the build.










Waiting on the next cranks and the bontrager xxx seat post. I hope to have all the parts next weekend.

Parts I will be selling are the brakes, cranks, seatpost

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

Nice! Look forward to seeing pics when it is done. Looking at your tool cabinets it appears we have similar tastes in shop layout 

I ran workbench rollers all the way down one of the walls in my shop. Because everyone needs a 24ft long toolbox lol


----------



## schnee (Oct 15, 2005)

Thanks everyone!


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

Geek said:


> Nice! Look forward to seeing pics when it is done. Looking at your tool cabinets it appears we have similar tastes in shop layout
> 
> I ran workbench rollers all the way down one of the walls in my shop. Because everyone needs a 24ft long toolbox lol


Need to see more pics of your garage. Any chance your on Garage Journal ? . If your not stay away as you will lose your mind looking at everyone's garage.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ZenkiS14 (Aug 25, 2008)

Anyone looking for a deal on a nice 2016 Farley 7? I'm unloading mine with less than 15 miles on it.


----------



## simen (Oct 21, 2004)

I'm going to install a dropper post to my 9.6 Farley. Could you show us the routing for stealth dropper post? Many thanks!


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

Go buy one of these for $9 at Home Depot and it will make your cable routing for that dropper install MUCH easier.


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

Way2ManyBikes said:


> Need to see more pics of your garage. Any chance your on Garage Journal ? . If your not stay away as you will lose your mind looking at everyone's garage.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Started a thread a few years ago... it is full of pics of my Sprinter van build iirc?

Cheers,
Ed


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

punchy712 said:


> I recently picked up a 2016 Farley 7 and I'm trying to setup the stock wheels/tires (Barbegazi on Mulefut) to tubless, mostly following this writeup: Tubeless Fatbike Conversion Update | Cycles In Life
> 
> I added the Sunring rim strip, taped it with the Scotch Tough Duct tape end to end (the best I could, I'm not sure how crucial it is to go to the absolute edge of the rim, under the lip). I put the tire on, sprayed it with some soapy water and pumped up the tire with my compressor to about 20-22psi to set the bead. It looks like the bead is set (tire also popped a few times), however there's air leaks on the rim around each square hole (sorry, not sure what these are called) and in a couple of spots around the bead.
> 
> Is this rim/tire combo supposed to be able to hold air without any sealant, or am I just expecting too much here and this is what the sealant's supposed to do? I'd just like to double check with others that have more experience before I start adding sealant and make a mess of it.





punchy712 said:


> Thanks for confirming. I'll be using the orange seal sealant as well, so hopefully it'll hold.
> 
> One more question about the tubeless setup. Stock wheels as they come from Trek with tubes, also have a rim strip installed. As far as I can tell, this isn't the same as the Sunringle rim strip that's recommended for the Mulefut tubless setup. For those of you that went tubeless, did you remove the stock/Trek rim strip and use the Sunringle one, did you simply use the stock rim strip, or did you put the Sunringle one on top of the existing rim strip?
> 
> Currently I added the Sunringle rimstrip on top of the existing rim strip, but I'm starting to wonder if that's causing sealing issues.


I have the same bike and recently completed my tubeless setup.

I used the SunRingle rim strips and the SunRingle tape.

I made homebrew sealant using latex, RV antifreeze and Slime

No issues whatsoever.

You need to remove the stock Trek rimstrip and not reuse it.

Clean everything.

Install the SunRingle strip.

Tape pretty much edge to edge (I wouldn't use duct tape).

Mine have been flawless for a month now. Tires held a constant 7 PSI from last week.

I managed to set one up with a floor pump, the other needed a shot from the compressor at the gas station (I used a presta adapter).

They held air for a bit until i added the sealant.


----------



## simen (Oct 21, 2004)

Will do. But does it go thru the seat tube, under the bb and comes out at the bottom of the seat tube?


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

it goes down the left side of the frame on the outside and enters the frame a couple of inches before the bottom bracket on top.. then curves up inside the bottom bracket and connects to your seat. 

The only part that is internal is from the seat post to the exit point on the frame a couple of inches in front of the bottom bracket.

Does that make sense?

edit: I'm headed out to the shop in a few minutes to install some new bars.. I'll take a photo for you


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

Here you go - the cable enters the frame where my fingers are. Hope this helps


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

Just installed some enve hdh bars - hoping they'll help with my back issues. :thumbsup:










Also trying out one of those oval rings.. did 17 miles with it on Sunday and my knees hurt less but who knows if its the ring or the sugar pill effect ut:


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

Geek said:


> Just installed some enve hdh bars - hoping they'll help with my back issues. :thumbsup:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Maybe a Suspension fork is in your future? It's in mine for sure for a few reasons. To relax or bring up the front end of the bike. Also to provide some cushy body relieving trail gobbling traction in mixed mostly non-snow conditions.(That was a mouthful!) In snow I like the rigid...non-snow, not so much. And yes, I've lowered the psi in the tires to sub 5lb levels.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JerseyMoutainBiker (Sep 12, 2016)

Geek said:


> Here you go - the cable enters the frame where my fingers are. Hope this helps


Did you take the port cover out (and leave it out) when inserting the dropper cable or does it go through the port cover (or is there a new cover to fit the cable through)?


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

For those who have a 1x set up and a non internal dropper, I managed to internal a cheap Tmars dropper for winter riding (all mechanical) by using the front shifter cable routing. Would look even better with a different external one I'm sure... The blue tape was removed since photo as well since I got my clear 3M stuff 









Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

JerseyMoutainBiker said:


> Did you take the port cover out (and leave it out) when inserting the dropper cable or does it go through the port cover (or is there a new cover to fit the cable through)?


I removed the port cover... I thought about drilling through it as that'd be an option.

My bike nor my buddy's bike came with any type of port plug - seems like a weird oversight?

My buddy just left his open but I don't like that idea as its a water inlet straight to your bottom bracket (especially snow riding!). I made my open port plug by drilling out my unused front derailer outlet - it didn't fit perfect but with some black silicon it came out fairly nice and it is water tight... I'll see if I can find a photo


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

Here's a photo of what I did... not perfect but it is waterproof. 

This did require drilling out the derailer outlet (which I'll never use as my bike is 1/12) which surprisingly is metal and was difficult to drill (I couldn't get a clamp to hold it right in my drill press so had to hand massage it).


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

66 degrees on the trail today - crazy Feb temps for Colorado and supposed to be over 70 tomorrow!

Had to play hooky for a few hours


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

Rideon said:


> Maybe a Suspension fork is in your future? It's in mine for sure for a few reasons. To relax or bring up the front end of the bike. Also to provide some cushy body relieving trak


Maybe 

I'm still torn between a Lauf (which would keep the bike lighter) and a Bluto... or leaving the bike in its super light mode that it is now. I haven't been able to decide yet. 
I am fortunate to also have a full suspension Yeti SB95C for when I am going to ride rougher stuff.

After today's ride (16 miles, 2100 ft of climbing) I am pretty happy with the HDH bars; even at the full 800mm today they felt great! (I'm a pretty big guy... not sure if I'm going to trim them or not). Really helped the geometry match me better.. the bike is finally coming together and fitting me how I want it.

If anyone wants to buy the fancy 9.9 seat, carbon seat post, carbon bars or carbon steering stem let me know


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

Geek said:


> Maybe
> 
> I'm still torn between a Lauf (which would keep the bike lighter) and a Bluto... or leaving the bike in its super light mode that it is now. I haven't been able to decide yet.
> I am fortunate to also have a full suspension Yeti SB95C for when I am going to ride rougher stuff.
> ...


The Wren suspension fork, though heavier, has been getting rave reviews. It would work with the 27.5 x 4.5 tires too. If you're only gonna run 27.5 x 3.8 tires with suspension, I'm thinking the Fox 34 27.5 would be a great choice too. I have a Bluto w/RCT on another bike and its underwhelming.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

Quick question. I have a 2016 9.6 and was toying around with getting a carbon crankset. What are the specs I need to look for? I can't find them on treks website, they are a bit vague about actual numbers. Thanks.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Geek said:


> 66 degrees on the trail today
> 
> That is so freaking cool dude. Wow. Sweet bike, sweet weather, sweet scenery. You're a lucky dude.


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

Quick question. I have a 2016 9.6 and was toying around with getting a carbon crankset. What are the specs I need to look for? I can't find them on treks website, they are a bit vague about actual numbers. Thanks.


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

I new the 27.5 x 4.5 were big I just didn't realize how big they were.










Also had the local bike shop replace the stock wheels with a set 27.5 Jackalopes. Going to give the 27.5 rims a try before swap the hub on my HED wheel set. Who knows I may like 27.5 more then 26























































These will also double as my Winter wheel set if we ever see snow again.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

I've searched through the threads. What is the best chainring to get for optimal chainline? I want a 32T. The reverse dish Wolftooth only comes in a 30. I was told I can get the CAMO system from Wolftooth. Or just buy a normal RaceFace Cinch 32t? What has worked? Thanks!


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

twentyniner29 said:


> I've searched through the threads. What is the best chainring to get for optimal chainline? I want a 32T. The reverse dish Wolftooth only comes in a 30. I was told I can get the CAMO system from Wolftooth. Or just buy a normal RaceFace Cinch 32t? What has worked? Thanks!


If you want an oval ring, it has to be specified as a reverse dish, so very few options available. If you want a standard round ring, any Cinch ring will work as long as you mount it reversed. Not sure how big you can go before there is clearance issues though. Stock is 28 I believe, and I run a 26 so I have tons of room.


----------



## Geek (Aug 17, 2010)

I'm running the Absoluteblack oval with the XX1 eagle setup. It has a +6 offset.


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

Yea, I want a round 32t. So all round Cinch rings are offset? It's just not listed in the specs?


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Does anyone know how much the stock AL fork on the 2016 Farley 5 (probably same as 2017 Farley 5) weighs?


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

twentyniner29 said:


> Yea, I want a round 32t. So all round Cinch rings are offset? It's just not listed in the specs?


I run a 32 cinch flipped and it fits fine. No issues.

Sent from my Z983 using Tapatalk


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

twentyniner29 said:


> I've searched through the threads. What is the best chainring to get for optimal chainline? I want a 32T. The reverse dish Wolftooth only comes in a 30. I was told I can get the CAMO system from Wolftooth. Or just buy a normal RaceFace Cinch 32t? What has worked? Thanks!


Absolute Black's Oval for Boost Cinch works best. Read near bottom for fat specifics:
https://absoluteblack.cc/raceface-oval-boost-cinch-chainring


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

Thanks guys!


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Does anyone know how much the stock AL fork on the 2016 Farley 5 (probably same as 2017 Farley 5) weighs?


Stock fork, less crown race, but incl. +20 brake adapter & caliper bolts 1087g

(2016 Farley 5 17.5")


----------



## Tctic (Nov 3, 2015)

I have dilemma. I can't decide which Farley to get. Money is always a object but there is no sense to buy crappy bike.

1. -16 Farley 5 is 1370€ (almost same amount in $): alu frame, 10x, avid db1, 26x4,7" 80mm Mulefuts and aluminium fork
2. -17 Farley 7 is 2099€: alu frame, 11x, sram level, 26x4,7" 80mm Mulefuts and carbon fork (difference to Farley 5 carbon fork, little bit better brakes and 11x)
3. -16 Farley 9.6 is 2028€: carbon frame, 11x, avid db3, 27,5x4" 80mm Jackalopes and carbon fork (difference to Farley 7 carbon frame, brakes, Jackalope rims and 27,5x4" types).

Which you would take? -16 Farley 7 would be best for me but they didn't import it to Europe at 2016.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

I would buy the 9.6 if the $600 wasn't an issue.


----------



## JohnJ80 (Oct 10, 2008)

Tctic said:


> I have dilemma. I can't decide which Farley to get. Money is always a object but there is no sense to buy crappy bike.
> 
> 1. -16 Farley 5 is 1370€ (almost same amount in $): alu frame, 10x, avid db1, 26x4,7" 80mm Mulefuts and aluminium fork
> 2. -17 Farley 7 is 2099€: alu frame, 11x, sram level, 26x4,7" 80mm Mulefuts and carbon fork (difference to Farley 5 carbon fork, little bit better brakes and 11x)
> ...


#3. That's a really good price for a 9.6 if I did the math right on the currency conversion and it's a *lot* more bike. I'm a big fan of the 27.5" format at 3.8" and even more so at 4.5" tires for snow and sand.

I have a 9.8 and I'm really amazed at how quick and nimble the bike is. Part of that is the carbon frame and part of that is the geometry. But my biggest reason for buying the Trek Farley was the tire format and so far that decision has turned out to be a very good one. Trek's research into rims and tires at that size is spot on at least in my application.

J.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

IMO humble opinion, which is worth exactly what you paid for it, the 9.6 is the best bang for the buck anywhere on a fatbike. Which would explain why they sold every one already, or at least that's what I was told anyway. If it's true, that's quite a feat considering so many companies are struggling with fatbike sales right now.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Misterg said:


> Stock fork, less crown race, but incl. +20 brake adapter & caliper bolts 1087g
> 
> (2016 Farley 5 17.5")


Thanks! I mean I own the F5 but no scales and wondering if a replacement carbon fork is worth it for the weight savings. At the moment the only one I would consider (if I came into a small fortune) would be the Lauf Carbonara which is listed as "sub" 1100g so not that much different. I'm quite happy with rigid at the moment.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Tctic said:


> I have dilemma. I can't decide which Farley to get. Money is always a object but there is no sense to buy crappy bike.
> 
> 1. -16 Farley 5 is 1370€ (almost same amount in $): alu frame, 10x, avid db1, 26x4,7" 80mm Mulefuts and aluminium fork
> 2. -17 Farley 7 is 2099€: alu frame, 11x, sram level, 26x4,7" 80mm Mulefuts and carbon fork (difference to Farley 5 carbon fork, little bit better brakes and 11x)
> ...


I had the exact same dilemma. I went to my local Trek dealer and he said he could get any of them, then looked it up on the system and the 7 didn't appear for him. It was the one I wanted due to slightly higher spec and carbon fork but I was a bit hesitant on the colour. The '16 F7 was a bright purple which I liked but not sure how long I would like it for.
The 5 is an awesome bike but Trek seriously f***ed up putting a 135mm hub/fork on it...more so cos they are in my mind leading a lot of the fat bike standards (eg sliding dropouts. variable wheel sizes). It was obviously done as a cost saving exercise. I'm already thinking about upgrading mine (probably fork, brakes and tyres next) so as one of the other guys has said...I would go with the 9.6. I'm kind of baffled why BOTH the 2016/17 F7's aren't being imported to Europe. Weird.


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

Anyone come across any recent frame bags that fit the 19.5" frame really well? I have a Blackburn medium expandable one but it doesn't fill the frame well and I find is limited space wise.. Thanks!

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Broke my rear hub again today. 2nd one to go on Farley 7. Trek warrantied first one 8months ago.

*What is a bulletproof hub?* I was thinking of The DT Swiss 350 Big Ride? I would love a silent Onyx hub but too rich for my blood.

DT Swiss 350:
https://www.universalcycles.com/shopping/product_details.php?id=80813

What about Novatech?
https://www.amazon.com/Novatec-D202SB-D201SB-15x150mm-12x197mm/dp/B015MTZCJM

Or Hope?

Hate the i9 killer bee buzz.



geop said:


> From July 2016: My rear hub locked up on Saturday. One pawl partially broke as well. LBS mechanic couldn't find a pawl rebuild kit listing. Price is $150CDN for a new freehub. I insisted a warranty claim as it is barely 2 months old.


----------



## Ettanfinland (Oct 31, 2013)

I can't find it anywhere, what is Farley 7 seatclamp size?


----------



## PoshJosh (Mar 30, 2007)

Ettanfinland said:


> I can't find it anywhere, what is Farley 7 seatclamp size?


36.4


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

geop said:


> Broke my rear hub again today. 2nd one to go on Farley 7. Trek warrantied first one 8months ago.
> 
> *What is a bulletproof hub?* I was thinking of The DT Swiss 350 Big Ride? I would love a silent Onyx hub but too rich for my blood.
> 
> ...


Here is my freehub. One pawl is shaved off. The hub bangs everytime I crank on it uphill. Dealer has pawl kit for me. :thumbsup:

I would suggest everyone check their freehub. Mine was fairly/farley  dirty. Easy enough to remove, clean and regrease.

But I plan to upgrade the hub to a DT Swiss 350 Big Ride soon.


----------



## DomDP (Feb 17, 2017)

I was able to snag a 2017 9.6 on Monday!

I called about 9 LBS all of them laughed and said they sold their last one months ago - that Trek is no longer making them and that the 18's will be out over the summer.

The 10th dealer I almost didn't call - but glad I did, they had one 19.5 left!

So far got a few runs in - nasty rock gardens, roots, gravel, steep climbs wet leaves, and narrow single track - the bike is so freaking fun to ride and climbs way better than I thought it would. 

I am running 9psi in back and 8psi in front that I need to drop asap - I was bouncing a tad more than I wanted. Going to wait until the 30 day service to go tubeless and just learn the bike until then. 

Any tips or must have add-ons (seat post dropper is soon too) I should know about with this carbon frame?

Thanks everyone!


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

geop said:


> Here is my freehub. One pawl is shaved off. The hub bangs everytime I crank on it uphill. Dealer has pawl kit for me. :thumbsup:
> 
> I would suggest everyone check their freehub. Mine was fairly/farley  dirty. Easy enough to remove, clean and regrease.
> 
> But I plan to upgrade the hub to a DT Swiss 350 Big Ride soon.


Blew my 6s twice in one winter, got a dt on it over the following summer. Ive been harder on it than ever and zero issues. 18t is sturdier, quiet. 36t and 54t (52?) buzz like bees but can possibly chip ( not easy tho) The ease of changing the ratchet too less is amazing.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

DomDP said:


> I was able to snag a 2017 9.6 on Monday!
> 
> I called about 9 LBS all of them laughed and said they sold their last one months ago - that Trek is no longer making them and that the 18's will be out over the summer.
> 
> ...


Slam that back wheel forward, tubeless, ride the snot out of it.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

geop said:


> I would suggest everyone check their freehub. Mine was fairly/farley  dirty. Easy enough to remove, clean and regrease.


[Being lazy] How do you remove it? [/Being lazy]

I suspect the bearings are on the way out on mine - it grumbles a bit when back pedaling.


----------



## akacoke (May 11, 2011)

Negotiator50 said:


> I run a 32 cinch flipped and it fits fine. No issues.
> 
> Sent from my Z983 using Tapatalk


i have a 28t Flipped, there is about 5mm clearance, i thought i can not have gone bigger


----------



## DomDP (Feb 17, 2017)

solarplex said:


> Slam that back wheel forward, tubeless, ride the snot out of it.


YES sir!


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

akacoke said:


> i have a 28t Flipped, there is about 5mm clearance, i thought i can not have gone bigger


Running Wolftooth CAMO with a 32 at the moment.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

Misterg said:


> [Being lazy] How do you remove it? [/Being lazy]
> 
> I suspect the bearings are on the way out on mine - it grumbles a bit when back pedaling.


Remove the cassette with a standard chain whip and lockring tool. The freehub slides right off.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Cheers bud! :thumbsup:


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

OK, if you're as dumb as me, you might need someone to tell you that the freehub won't come off until you've taken the end cap off - the bit with the hole in here:










It just pushes on, but even with the nail, I couldn't move the cap without resorting to levering against the freehub with a screwdriver. It was well and truly stuck in place.










My pawls are intact (thank goodness), but there was very little lubrication left:










and a lot of rust / fretting










Everything cleaned up OK and still seems in serviceable condition:



















Don't lose the spacer!










I lubed the pawls with some heavy gear oil put everything back together and it is working fine. The bearings in the freehub are fine - the grumbling noise I was hearing was the dork disc rubbing on the spokes :blush:

Thanks to Geop for a timely reminder - thankfully my freeehub is OK, but it was definitely in need of some maintenance.


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

Hmmm... I had my hub come off while shaking the sealant around in my tire this week... Maybe I should look into that a little... 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Well, I Bluto'ed my Farley 7 and threw on the 29+ summer setup.

I rode the wheels last year and loved them, added the squish this year for a bit more comfort.

It's an RL 100mm travel.


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

Swerny said:


> Well, I Bluto'ed my Farley 7 and threw on the 29+ summer setup.
> 
> I rode the wheels last year and loved them, added the squish this year for a bit more comfort.
> 
> ...


Nice!

How does she ride????

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Rideon said:


> Nice!
> 
> How does she ride????
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks!

I haven't got a ride in yet due to the weather. Tons of rain


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Anyone know how large of a front chainring will fit on a 9.8 (flipped chainring on cinch crankset spindle for 170 rear). 

With 11-46 and 11-50 cassettes becoming more prevalent, I am considering going to a 36t front chainring, but not sure it will fit without hitting the​ chainstay.

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Negotiator50 said:


> Anyone know how large of a front chainring will fit on a 9.8 (flipped chainring on cinch crankset spindle for 170 rear).
> 
> With 11-46 and 11-50 cassettes becoming more prevalent, I am considering going to a 36t front chainring, but not sure it will fit without hitting the chainstay.
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


34 is the biggest.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tadraper (Apr 14, 2010)

LunchRider said:


> 34 is the biggest.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


When I had a 9.8 I used a 36th oval ring no issues with a 9-44 cassette.


----------



## LunchRider (Oct 22, 2015)

Oh nice, didn't know that. Why did you get rid of your 9.8?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jeepmandan (Apr 7, 2017)

Hello,

I'm looking at a used 2016 9.6 locally. They don't know the frame size. Would the traditional center of BB to top of seat tube measurement be accurate on this bike? I'm thinking it's either 15.5" or 17.5"


----------



## smitty39 (Sep 8, 2016)

If you go to trekbikes.com and pull up the page for the Farley 9.6, it has detailed measurements for every dimension of the frame. '16 and '17 are the same frame.


----------



## Jeepmandan (Apr 7, 2017)

smitty39 said:


> If you go to trekbikes.com and pull up the page for the Farley 9.6, it has detailed measurements for every dimension of the frame. '16 and '17 are the same frame.


Thanks bud! That helped. It's a 17.5"
I closed the deal this morning. It was at a pawn shop stickered for $1295. I offered a grand plus tax and walked out the door.

More details later. Need to de-sticker it. Some kid put a bunch of crappy stickers on it.

First fat bike for me!


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

My third bottom bracket on my 2016 9.8 is starting to make that dreaded creaking noise. Two Racaface that are spec'd and an Enduro replacement. Anyone have any suggestions for better ones than the Enduro ones that fit the 9.8?

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk


----------



## thedonk13 (Apr 26, 2016)

geop said:


> What about Novatech?
> https://www.amazon.com/Novatec-D202SB-D201SB-15x150mm-12x197mm/dp/B015MTZCJM


I'm new, so mind my ignorance. But i am building a 29+ set for my farley, and these fit the price nicely.....yet they say shimano drive, not XD....

will these work with the my 2016 farley 7 with the SRAM GX1?

thank you


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Has anyone tried the Wheels Manufacturing threaded together Pressfit 41mm Abec-3 Fat Bike Bottom Bracket in a Farley 9.8 or similar bike? I am fed up with the creaking from the press fit bottom bracket. I have tried two of the race face bottom brackets and one Enduro bottom bracket. All have ended up creaking within a few short months. I was wondering if these new bottom brackets that thread together at the sleeve will eliminate these creaks.


----------



## geop (Jun 6, 2015)

thedonk13 said:


> I'm new, so mind my ignorance. But i am building a 29+ set for my farley, and these fit the price nicely.....yet they say shimano drive, not XD....
> 
> will these work with the my 2016 farley 7 with the SRAM GX1?
> 
> thank you


No. hub needs to be XD Driver/freehub. Search Amazon for a Novatec 197 with XD.


----------



## biscut (Sep 11, 2015)

I'm trying to hold out for a 18 Farley 9.8 BUT man I saw a few 16 and 17 Farley's marked down at a LBS and I was shaking for the credit card....I swear, if the 16 purple was a 19.5 and not a 15 whatever...It was sooo cheap I woulda been walking out the door with it and ordering up a set of wheels!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Has anyone had any experience of the 4.7 Barbs warping or going out of shape on the F5. I noticed a definite wobble in my front on last 2 rides and noticed that there's a slight gap between the bead where logo is and rim (just a couple mm). Running tubes & not had a chance to investigate yet but I'm also thinking it's more likely the rim has been slightly bent/not true and then that's causing the tyre deformation. I was execting 80mm Mulefuts to be rock solid but I guess like any bike rim they can go out. I've no real experience of truing wheels other than the odd minor spoke adjustment. Is there anything additional I need to know when truing fat bike rims? Same principles I would assume.


----------



## fishboy316 (Jan 10, 2014)

Same principles apply. If you are using a truing stand I has to fit a fat wheel.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

fishboy316 said:


> Same principles apply. If you are using a truing stand I has to fit a fat wheel.


my mate has a truing stand that has adapters to take fat rim. I'm probably gonna have to try it in front fork upside down with elastic band & pencil or something.


----------



## fishboy316 (Jan 10, 2014)

Have you spun it to see if any visible damage? The pencil thing is ok but only so accurate. Good luck.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

fishboy316 said:


> Have you spun it to see if any visible damage? The pencil thing is ok but only so accurate. Good luck.


Yep, just set up 2 zip ties on either side of forks & span front. Definitely out a bit pulling to one side & also vertically (if that's the right term) so the rim in being stretched out of a perfect circle so that's what's causing the tyre bob. I had limited light but checked rear & it's also out ever so slightly. I'm surprised these have untrued themselves so easily. Not like I've been doing gap jumps...mostly XC/natural trails. Due to run this bike in its first race on Sunday but gonna switch to my Anthem & not risk damaging rims further until I can spend some time & get it fixed properly.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

I seen the 2018 farley 5 and 7. Pretty sweet upgrades. 

27.5"
Gnarwhals.

7 has mastodon and nx now
5 has 1x10 deore and the carbon fork.

No word on the carbons or ex bikes. My LBS said its probably a change and they are waiting on something. 

Hoping they changed the hubs! The rep was kind of shocked i had so much trouble with mine. 

I hope so bad they their new rapid drive hubs like their new kovees. Even if they are 3 pawls ill add 3 more to make them 6. Hard to buy a bike and need to upgrade the hub right away. My dt 350 cost me $500+ in canada


----------



## Red_Label (Sep 2, 2008)

I finally ordered a 100mm Bluto RTC to put on my '16 Farley 9.6 several weeks ago. I wish that I'd have done it last May (2016) when I bought the bike new. It was easy to put on, though the part where I got out my hacksaw and removed 4 inches off the steering tube made me nervous. The last couple of weeks of technical trail riding have been a pleasure. The first trip out was an adjustment, in that I was used to the flickability of the stock carbon fork. That 5# weight difference was noticeable to say the least! But once I got used to being able to plow through rock gardens and run into short ledges without lifting the front end, there was no looking back. I LOVE IT!!!

I had a brand new EX8 at the checkout counter of my LBS right before I ordered the Bluto, but had forgotten my credit card. The EX was on sale for $2,800. I'm SO glad that I had a cool off period where I decided to try the fork upgrade instead. The EX would have been a great bike, but noticeably heavier and I just don't need two fat bikes of that caliber. The Bluto made my 9.6 the perfect bike for me. I've been putting lots of miles on it lately.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

I am planning to put a Manitou Magnum Pro (or Yari) 120mm fork with 29"+ wheels and 3" tires on my new Farley 7 for summer riding. While Farley feels great on natural trails, I am not very happy how it rolls on dirt roads and gravel (bikepacking is my thing).

I am not sure if this fork will fit the frame. So I could use a little help regarding converting my Farley 7 to 29"+ summer fatbike. Also, I would like to learn a good options for wheels/tires to consider. Not sure should I look for a wheelset or should buy rims/hubs separately? Another topic - which 3" tires I should get? Are Bontrager Chupacabra's a decent choice?


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Mebaru said:


> I am planning to put a Manitou Magnum Pro (or Yari) 120mm fork with 29"+ wheels and 3" tires on my new Farley 7 for summer riding. While Farley feels great on natural trails, I am not very happy how it rolls on dirt roads and gravel (bikepacking is my thing).
> 
> I am not sure if this fork will fit the frame. So I could use a little help regarding converting my Farley 7 to 29"+ summer fatbike. Also, I would like to learn a good options for wheels/tires to consider. Not sure should I look for a wheelset or should buy rims/hubs separately? Another topic - which 3" tires I should get? Are Bontrager Chupacabra's a decent choice?


Last year I put a Magnum 100mm travel fork on my Farley 9.6 with no issues. Considered the 120 but opted to be conservative and try to match the stock geometry in the sagged position.
I built the wheels up using I9 hubs and Nextie carbon rims. Used the Chupacabra's based on reviews, and have been happy with them, but no tire excels at everything so likely condition dependent. Don't know if there are more options for 3" 29+ tires now compared to last year. The bike lost over 2 lbs with weight savings from the wheels and weight addition of the fork. Quite happy with this for spring/summer/fall.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

JackP42 said:


> Last year I put a Magnum 100mm travel fork on my Farley 9.6 with no issues. Considered the 120 but opted to be conservative and try to match the stock geometry in the sagged position.
> I built the wheels up using I9 hubs and Nextie carbon rims. Used the Chupacabra's based on reviews, and have been happy with them, but no tire excels at everything so likely condition dependent. Don't know if there are more options for 3" 29+ tires now compared to last year. The bike lost over 2 lbs with weight savings from the wheels and weight addition of the fork. Quite happy with this for spring/summer/fall.


Thanks, JackP42. You're probably right, I should consider buying a 100mm fork rather than 120mm. I read that 120mm raises bike front a lot. Still not sure I want carbon rims. What model of Nextie rims you have? For the hubs - I am thinking to use Hope Pro 4.


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Mebaru said:


> Thanks, JackP42. You're probably right, I should consider buying a 100mm fork rather than 120mm. I read that 120mm raises bike front a lot. Still not sure I want carbon rims. What model of Nextie rims you have? For the hubs - I am thinking to use Hope Pro 4.


Check the axle to crown height on the fork that Trek uses on the Farley models equipped with the Bluto and compare to the fork you are thinking of. I think you'll find the 120 Magnum is a fair bit longer. This will slacken the bike and raise the BB. Depending on your riding might be good or might compromise the bike.
The Nextie rims I went with are these: [NXT29JF52-II] [Jungle Fox II] 52mm Width Carbon Semi-Fat MTB 29+ Rim Hookless Tubeless Compatible 29-52mm | 34mm Depth | 530g | Tubeless | Tire 3.0~3.8" | AM / Enduro | 3.5mm Rim Lip Thickness


----------



## theGliberal (Sep 25, 2009)

I see that the new version of the 9.8 is being spec'd with the dropper post.

"Bontrager Drop Line 125, internal routing, 31.6mm (15.5: Drop Line 100)"


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

solarplex said:


> I seen the 2018 farley 5 and 7. Pretty sweet upgrades.
> 
> 27.5"
> Gnarwhals.
> ...


Can you post a link to this?

I am totally getting the new 7 or 9.6 if they are spec'd with a Mastodon and the 27.5 x 4.5 wheels & tires. I would want better than NX though.

I was thinking of upgrading to this 2017 9.6 and getting a Mastodon but maybe I'll hold off for a 2018


----------



## the mayor (Nov 18, 2004)

solarplex said:


> I seen the 2018 farley 5 and 7. Pretty sweet upgrades.
> 
> 27.5"
> Gnarwhals.
> ...


The Mastodon on the 7 is going to be a Comp model. No idea on travel....but I'd guess 100


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Red_Label said:


> I finally ordered a 100mm Bluto RTC to put on my '16 Farley 9.6 several weeks ago. I wish that I'd have done it last May (2016) when I bought the bike new. The first trip out was an adjustment, in that I was used to the flickability of the stock carbon fork. That 5# weight difference was noticeable to say the least! But once I got used to being able to plow through rock gardens and run into short ledges without lifting the front end, there was no looking back. I LOVE IT!!!.


I think it ads more like 2.5 pounds...i recently added one as well to my 7. Running 29+ though, the weight savings in the wheels more than makes up for it.



Mebaru said:


> I am planning to put a Manitou Magnum Pro (or Yari) 120mm fork with 29"+ wheels and 3" tires on my new Farley 7 for summer riding. While Farley feels great on natural trails, I am not very happy how it rolls on dirt roads and gravel (bikepacking is my thing).
> 
> I am not sure if this fork will fit the frame. So I could use a little help regarding converting my Farley 7 to 29"+ summer fatbike. Also, I would like to learn a good options for wheels/tires to consider. Not sure should I look for a wheelset or should buy rims/hubs separately? Another topic - which 3" tires I should get? Are Bontrager Chupacabra's a decent choice?


29+ fits fine even with the dropout all the way forward. I have 35 mm internal carbon rims with Chupas and really like the setup. they have far better than grip then you would think they would just by looking at them.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Need help again. Hit the lying trunk with a right pedal today, it was slightly skewed after that and off the thread. When I unscrewed the pedal it completely destroyed the thread on Race Face Aeffect crack arm! Pedal thread was ok though (Hope F20). 

I need to replace crank arm now - what options do I have? Am I stuck with Race Face cinch direct mount crank arms only? I was thinking about Hope crank arms.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Swerny said:


> Can you post a link to this?
> 
> I am totally getting the new 7 or 9.6 if they are spec'd with a Mastodon and the 27.5 x 4.5 wheels & tires. I would want better than NX though.
> 
> I was thinking of upgrading to this 2017 9.6 and getting a Mastodon but maybe I'll hold off for a 2018


----------



## the mayor (Nov 18, 2004)

solarplex said:


>


It comes with a Mastodon Comp set at 80mm


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Mebaru said:


> Need help again. Hit the lying trunk with a right pedal today, it was slightly skewed after that and off the thread. When I unscrewed the pedal it completely destroyed the thread on Race Face Aeffect crack arm! Pedal thread was ok though (Hope F20).


Your LBS may be able to repair the crank with something like this:









https://www.vartools.com/en/9-16-x20tpi-pedal-thread-repair-kit-var-p396.php

I have a set, but I'm a long way away! They work well.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

the mayor said:


> It comes with a Mastodon Comp set at 80mm


Makes sense. I was doing some math and i came to the conclusion it would need a 80mm extended.

The ex then will need to be 100mm or some frame tweeking to run 120, also ive heard the dial hits the frame on the ex... maybe a knockblocker is needed.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Misterg said:


> Your LBS may be able to repair the crank with something like this:
> 
> https://www.vartools.com/en/9-16-x20tpi-pedal-thread-repair-kit-var-p396.php
> 
> I have a set, but I'm a long way away! They work well.


Thanks, will ask at my LBS. I can buy similar pedal thread repair kit here - Ice Toolz E521 - but it costs over $250, that's more than new Race Face Aeffect Crankset.


----------



## Misterg (Jul 17, 2014)

Mebaru said:


> Thanks, will ask at my LBS. I can buy similar pedal thread repair kit here - Ice Toolz E521 - but it costs over $250, that's more than new Race Face Aeffect Crankset.


Yeah, it makes no sense to buy the kit for a one-off repair, but it is something a LBS might have.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Where the hell are the 2018 carbon bikes already trek....


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

the mayor said:


> It comes with a Mastodon Comp set at 80mm


I'm disappointed to hear that it's set at 80 MM



solarplex said:


> Where the hell are the 2018 carbon bikes already trek....


seriously.

The trek thread has shots of the new Fuel EX.....nobody has details for the rest of Farley lineup?


----------



## the mayor (Nov 18, 2004)

Swerny said:


> I'm disappointed to hear that it's set at 80 MM


Unless it's some funky OEM spec fork....you can easily make it 100 in a few minutes with the removal of spacers on the air shaft.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

the mayor said:


> Unless it's some funky OEM spec fork....you can easily make it 100 in a few minutes with the removal of spacers on the air shaft.


Yep, hopefully they will have allowed this. Used to be standard on RS Recons. You could give yourself 80/100/120. I got a 2011 Recon 100mm on my Anthem and was able to increase it to 120.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

the mayor said:


> Unless it's some funky OEM spec fork....you can easily make it 100 in a few minutes with the removal of spacers on the air shaft.


100% correct and duly noted, but I hope that Trek isn't saying a longer fork than 80 MM would void the warranty.


----------



## the mayor (Nov 18, 2004)

Swerny said:


> 100% correct and duly noted, but I hope that Trek isn't saying a longer fork than 80 MM would void the warranty.


I don't know why so many people have angst over voiding the warranty.
What do you really think 20mm could do to a frame?
You can swap it back to 80 in a few minutes.....and I doubt a rep would ever measure the travel of the fork.
Now if you put a dual crown 8 inch fork on there....


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

I did the math and the 80mm fork unless im of on my sag will sit lower than the carbon.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

the mayor said:


> I don't know why so many people have angst over voiding the warranty.
> What do you really think 20mm could do to a frame?
> You can swap it back to 80 in a few minutes.....and I doubt a rep would ever measure the travel of the fork.
> Now if you put a dual crown 8 inch fork on there....


Man people are nuts. Ive blown ball joints and cv joints like crazy on my leveled ram and dodge fixed it every time, no questions asked... i just, you know, didnt say it was leveled when i brought it in

20mm was added to the fork! Thats why the free hub blew and its not going to be replaced on warranty!


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

the mayor said:


> I don't know why so many people have angst over voiding the warranty.
> What do you really think 20mm could do to a frame?
> You can swap it back to 80 in a few minutes.....and I doubt a rep would ever measure the travel of the fork.
> Now if you put a dual crown 8 inch fork on there....


I have never taken a fork apart, so i would likely have the shop do it for me, which would be the same shop i bought the bike from.

I'd hope the FRAME warranty would be OK if the headtube snapped as a result.



solarplex said:


> Man people are nuts. Ive blown ball joints and cv joints like crazy on my leveled ram and dodge fixed it every time, no questions asked... i just, you know, didnt say it was leveled when i brought it in
> 
> 20mm was added to the fork! Thats why the free hub blew and its not going to be replaced on warranty!


As per above, if i wasn't clear enough, I'm talking about a claim for the frame...not the freehub. There are enough stories of carbon frames snapping


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Swerny said:


> I have never taken a fork apart, so i would likely have the shop do it for me, which would be the same shop i bought the bike from.
> 
> I'd hope the FRAME warranty would be OK if the headtube snapped as a result.
> 
> As per above, if i wasn't clear enough, I'm talking about a claim for the frame...not the freehub. There are enough stories of carbon frames snapping


I know it was frame related, i was being snarky.

Any lbs would do the fork mods and most manufactures allow 20mm of travel added.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

solarplex said:


> Any lbs would do the fork mods and most manufactures allow 20mm of travel added.


You are probably right.

Now....back to anxiously awaiting the rest of the 2018 Farley lineup


----------



## akacoke (May 11, 2011)

has anyone installed a matsdon on a farley 5 or 7? I wanna see if the tuning knobs clear the down tube


----------



## patada (Jul 11, 2008)

TheFarleys said:


> Sorry but I don't have a scale. Would be interesting to know though. Is there anyone else out there who would have both a 9 and a scale?


anyone ever get a stock 9 weight


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Anyone any experience of Warranty claim with F5 or any model Farley with Trek UK? I know frames are Lifetime, but other Trek parts 2 years, can't see anything on wheels specifically. I've a pretty grindy noise from rear wheel/cassette when backpedalling which I hope is just misaligned chain/rear mech. Is there an easy way to test/ascertain this without disassembly of the rear hub? I've chucked it to a mechanic friend for a first opinion but he said if it is likely to be hub best for me to take it directly to reseller/Trek before he does any further work. Thanks


----------



## avikoren1 (Jul 1, 2006)

the mayor said:


> It comes with a Mastodon Comp set at 80mm


Just put a deposit on this bike, due in late Sep.


----------



## avikoren1 (Jul 1, 2006)

the mayor said:


> It comes with a Mastodon Comp set at 80mm


Put a deposit on the 2018 Farley 7


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Well i know what colour the 9.6 is but there has to be changes with these delays?! Im hoping they put their new hubs on the new bikes, even if its the 3 pawl that i can add 3 more to make it the rapid drive.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

solarplex said:


> Well i know what colour the 9.6 is but there has to be changes with these delays?! Im hoping they put their new hubs on the new bikes, even if its the 3 pawl that i can add 3 more to make it the rapid drive.


Care to share the colour and specs?


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Swerny said:


> Care to share the colour and specs?












I dont know specs other than the wampas are not correct, will have mulefuts again. Possibly exaclty the same as 17 but charcoal

Also the drive shown is wrong


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Anyone any experience of Warranty claim with F5 or any model Farley with Trek UK? I know frames are Lifetime, but other Trek parts 2 years, can't see anything on wheels specifically. I've a pretty grindy noise from rear wheel/cassette when backpedalling which I hope is just misaligned chain/rear mech. Is there an easy way to test/ascertain this without disassembly of the rear hub? I've chucked it to a mechanic friend for a first opinion but he said if it is likely to be hub best for me to take it directly to reseller/Trek before he does any further work. Thanks


Just an update for any other F5 owners. My mechanic friend says rear hub seems fine...noise likely just from slight chain misalignment. Creaking noise I experienced: he thinks likely seatpost/seattube junction or crank bolts rather than pressfit BB and currently don't want to go down route of replacing that. Rims only slightly out which is good news and tyre deformation more likely due to size of tyre and fit against rim. Only downside is my headset is a waterlogged mess and needs replaced. Hopefully have this brute back on the trail soon.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

9.6
- new colours 








9.8
- gx eagle
- bontrager dropper post


----------



## daver38 (Nov 26, 2015)

Can you ask your mechanic what the headset bearing sizes are, not sure if they are 45 degree or 45/36


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

daver38 said:


> Can you ask your mechanic what the headset bearing sizes are, not sure if they are 45 degree or 45/36


I will give him a shout and get back to you. I picked the Farley up from him last night as he did the tubeless setup for me. I had attempted it once before with the wrong tape and missed a critical step so basically bodged it. It wasn't helped by the fact my sealant was like lumpy gum and had been sitting around for too long. Tubeless - wow just WOW. It totally lifts the bike and makes it seem super responsive. I had been running this with tubes for a year and was getting a bit pissed off with the punctures. I was thinking about selling it but now I'm not so sure. Keen to get it out for a proper hammering. If I hold on to it I'm considering replacing the brakes with Deore or SLX. Anyone done the same? If so what adapters did you use and any real benefit to putting a 180mm rotor up front....I'm not doing any extreme descending...mostly standard trail stuff or natural single track. I found with the DB1s on this bike I could burn through a front pad pretty quickly, much faster than on an XC bike.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> I will give him a shout and get back to you. I picked the Farley up from him last night as he did the tubeless setup for me. I had attempted it once before with the wrong tape and missed a critical step so basically bodged it. It wasn't helped by the fact my sealant was like lumpy gum and had been sitting around for too long. Tubeless - wow just WOW. It totally lifts the bike and makes it seem super responsive. I had been running this with tubes for a year and was getting a bit pissed off with the punctures. I was thinking about selling it but now I'm not so sure. Keen to get it out for a proper hammering. If I hold on to it I'm considering replacing the brakes with Deore or SLX. Anyone done the same? If so what adapters did you use and any real benefit to putting a 180mm rotor up front....I'm not doing any extreme descending...mostly standard trail stuff or natural single track. I found with the DB1s on this bike I could burn through a front pad pretty quickly, much faster than on an XC bike.


I did deores on my 6 and it was just install and shorten hoses. I put a 180mm rotor and it seems to grab alot harder than a 160mm.

The deores were night and day over the DB1s for power and quiet. I would probably get slx this time around for the ability to run the finned metallic pads.


----------



## Jabrnet (Oct 21, 2016)

About to take my Farley 5 on its first bikepacking trip! Photos to follow soon!

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

solarplex said:


> I did deores on my 6 and it was just install and shorten hoses. I put a 180mm rotor and it seems to grab alot harder than a 160mm.
> 
> The deores were night and day over the DB1s for power and quiet. I would probably get slx this time around for the ability to run the finned metallic pads.


Interesting. Yeah if I do it I may go SLX. My DB1s are a bit of mess...rode a fair bit of beach and bog so getting lots of rotor rub. Will try the various tricks to see if I can eliminate most of it but if not it's either new brakes or sell the bike as is. Need to get out for a proper rip tubeless and see how it handles.

Do you run tubeless and if so do you carry a spare tube with you? I used to carry a spare fat tube but they are a ridiculous weight (400-450g I think). I'm just looking for a decent 26" fat/+ tube that will get me out of a tight spot yet not cost & weigh the earth (and also cover a 4.7" tyre adequately). Maybe I'm being over cautious with tubes/sealant but there's always a chance I'm stuck out in the middle of nowhere and slash a tyre badly on a rock.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Interesting. Yeah if I do it I may go SLX. My DB1s are a bit of mess...rode a fair bit of beach and bog so getting lots of rotor rub. Will try the various tricks to see if I can eliminate most of it but if not it's either new brakes or sell the bike as is. Need to get out for a proper rip tubeless and see how it handles.
> 
> Do you run tubeless and if so do you carry a spare tube with you? I used to carry a spare fat tube but they are a ridiculous weight (400-450g I think). I'm just looking for a decent 26" fat/+ tube that will get me out of a tight spot yet not cost & weigh the earth (and also cover a 4.7" tyre adequately). Maybe I'm being over cautious with tubes/sealant but there's always a chance I'm stuck out in the middle of nowhere and slash a tyre badly on a rock.


All 3 of my bikes are tubeless. I dont carry a tube, i carry a co2. We dont have sharp wall tearing rocks tho.

I ran a 26x2.75" bontrager tube in a 4.7" tire i used as a front before no issues if you want that as a emergency spare.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

solarplex said:


> All 3 of my bikes are tubeless. I dont carry a tube, i carry a co2. We dont have sharp wall tearing rocks tho.
> 
> I ran a 26x2.75" bontrager tube in a 4.7" tire i used as a front before no issues if you want that as a emergency spare.


good to know. I've heard of people running DH tubes as a backup. Hoping I won't need it. I've not bothered with co2 for road or MTB but found out the hard way that pumping up a fat bike tyre with an Airwave hand pump takes ages :-/


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

solarplex said:


> All 3 of my bikes are tubeless. I dont carry a tube, i carry a co2. We dont have sharp wall tearing rocks tho.
> 
> I ran a 26x2.75" bontrager tube in a 4.7" tire i used as a front before no issues if you want that as a emergency spare.


I thought I recall reading that co2 messes up the Stan's? I have a co2 capable pump but never bought the co2 because of that.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

you would need several CO2 canisters to fill a fat bike tire.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Swerny said:


> you would need several CO2 canisters to fill a fat bike tire.


Really? Have you tried? Cause a mtb one worked just fine for me.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Jeff_G said:


> I thought I recall reading that co2 messes up the Stan's? I have a co2 capable pump but never bought the co2 because of that.


It instantly solidifies the sealant. So i only intend on using a co2 on a hole I lost air on to air up and seal the hole.

I do carry a specialized fatbike pump for adjusting riding pressure on the go while riding.


----------



## kyle_craig (Oct 29, 2015)

Not a 2016 but I got my 2018 Farley 5 today. Pretty stoked on it---well spec'd for the price. It came out to about 30lbs w/o pedals setup tubeless w/ sun ringle tape and 4.5 oz sealant in each tire.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Swerny said:


> you would need several CO2 canisters to fill a fat bike tire.


Thought this myself. Might work fine for road but have heard most guys carry high volume pumps. Maybe I'm oldskool but never used co2 for road and I've done over 5,000km since I started road cycling. Never punctured once on road bike....of course I've cursed myself saying this. Just didn't like idea of carrying co2 cartridges but I totally get it if you are on a fast club ride or in an event and don't want to fall too far back. 5000km no punctures....took Farley out for first ride with tubes...flatted in first 20k with 2 thorns in the same tyre. I've 5 tubes....all covered with patches...lol. Now tubeless thankfully! Mind you I still run triples on 2 of my bikes so I'm probably considered odd.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

daver38 said:


> Can you ask your mechanic what the headset bearing sizes are, not sure if they are 45 degree or 45/36


I asked him but he says he can't remember, just measured at the time. Probably best to just dive in and take it apart.


----------



## Provincial (Jun 14, 2017)

I have a year old farley 7, currently have 26 x 4.7 tires 
specs say I can put 27.5 x 4.5 on the bike, does anyone know if the bike will fit 29"

I asked the local dealer yesterday and they didn't know
has anyone here tried it or know?


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Provincial said:


> I have a year old farley 7, currently have 26 x 4.7 tires
> specs say I can put 27.5 x 4.5 on the bike, does anyone know if the bike will fit 29"
> 
> I asked the local dealer yesterday and they didn't know
> has anyone here tried it or know?


AFAIK All 2016 Farleys can take 26" x 4.7", 27.5" x 4-4.5" (I think!) and 29" x 3". That's one of reasons they have those sliding dropouts at the back to allow different wheel sizes and change the way bike handles. You may need to adjust chain length. Thought about the 29 option myself but any time I rode a 29er while they were good rolling over stuff I found they feel like wagon wheels on tight technical climbs. I'm sure other forum members will chime in about this who have done it but one thing I love about the 26" x 4.7" is they are essentially like monster truck wheels and truck through anything. You "might" find with different wheel size/tyre size bike drops down a bit and you end up with more pedal strikes but this is just conjecture on my part as I haven't done it.

EDIT: You may even be able to put a 5" tyre in Farley. I've read some posts where people have put in larger than the stock Barbs. I think there's even a 6" fat tyre now !


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

kyle_craig said:


> View attachment 1147520
> View attachment 1147521
> 
> 
> Not a 2016 but I got my 2018 Farley 5 today. Pretty stoked on it---well spec'd for the price. It came out to about 30lbs w/o pedals setup tubeless w/ sun ringle tape and 4.5 oz sealant in each tire.


Carbon fork, 27.5" wheels, 1x, studable stock tires.... yah its well spec'd


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

solarplex said:


> Carbon fork, 27.5" wheels, 1x, studable stock tires.... yah its well spec'd


Like the new carbon fork. Pity Trek didn't offer a fork/wheel swap for us poor saps who were lulled into getting the '16 F5 with 135mm hub. Regardless it's unlikely I will put suspension on this thing u less it's a) light or b) cheap. Has Trek revealed any of the Farleys yet with the Mastodon fork?


----------



## indyfab25 (Feb 10, 2004)

Those Gnarwals are amazing in snow. 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Like the new carbon fork. Pity Trek didn't offer a fork/wheel swap for us poor saps who were lulled into getting the '16 F5 with 135mm hub. Regardless it's unlikely I will put suspension on this thing u less it's a) light or b) cheap. Has Trek revealed any of the Farleys yet with the Mastodon fork?


The 7 is red with a mastodon and nx drive, gnarwhal tires. I think the ex 8 has a bluto but the 9.8 has the mastodon


----------



## indyfab25 (Feb 10, 2004)

The 7









Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

solarplex said:


> Really? Have you tried? Cause a mtb one worked just fine for me.


you must be carrying a scuba tank with you


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

indyfab25 said:


> The 7
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Im having a tough time choosing the 7 or 9.6. I want the light weight and carbon frame for winter but then a fork and dropper for summer.

I might just get a 9.6 and run it stock all winter then buy a mastodon and dropper for it come spring to make a fun trail bike over my speedy top fuel.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

solarplex said:


> Im having a tough time choosing the 7 or 9.6. I want the light weight and carbon frame for winter but then a fork and dropper for summer.
> 
> I might just get a 9.6 and run it stock all winter then buy a mastodon and dropper for it come spring to make a fun trail bike over my speedy top fuel.


I'm having the same debate, also the 9.8 but I think that will be far more than I want to spend. I don't like red but i ride a purple bike...go figure

I am looking at the 2017 9.6 on clearance at a LBS.....i like the orange and the specs are the same as 2018.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Swerny said:


> I'm having the same debate, also the 9.8 but I think that will be far more than I want to spend. I don't like red but i ride a purple bike...go figure
> 
> I am looking at the 2017 9.6 on clearance at a LBS.....i like the orange and the specs are the same as 2018.


The 2018 9.8 is pretty sick. I would put the gx eagle on my top fuel and the x1 on it but im ok with gx and aluminum parts. The mulefuts are super durable and either way i need to upgrade the rear hub. The 2018 9.6 is charcoal too fyi.


----------



## PositiveIon (Jan 3, 2017)

Farley 7 owners out there, 2016, 2017, 17.5", I'm looking for Front-Center geometry measurement. Distance in mm from center of BB (crank) to center of front axle, front wheel dead straight ahead. Thanks!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Just some views on finally running tubeless on my 2016 F5. Been out for a good few rides now and the weight difference is noticeable. Bike with pedals is probably coming in around the 14kg mark and much faster to accelerate...a bit more pop over technical stuff. Been running at 10F/12R for gravel/pathways/road and 8F/10R on more single track stuff. I know I can go much lower but is working well at the moment. I had a friend carry out the tubeless setup as he had done a fair few as a race mechanic and this was his first fat bike. Used Airwave tubeless valves, Airshot, Stans sealant & injector and SunRingle tape. All is holding well and airtight. I've discovered that you can lose a little spray of sealant when opening valve to check/adjust pressure but my friend advises best way to do this is make sure the valve is at the top of the rim so that sealant rolls to the bottom. I've got an XC race at the end of the month on this bike in mixture of fireroad and boggy terrain so will experiment a bit more with tyre pressure before then. I've stopped carrying spare tubes (400-450g) at the moment usually as my rides haven't been anywhere too far off the beaten track but may opt for a Q-tubes superlight 2.2-2.7" just to get me out of a tight spot. Really don't want to be carrying fat tubes ever again. Have replaced the standard 80mm Bontrager stem with a Truvativ AKA 70mm to shorten cockpit a bit as these bikes size up big and I was getting a bit of a sore back on longer rides (I'm 6' 1"). Replaced stock grips with SDG Han Solos. SRAM DB1s are the weakest link on this bike. Was getting LOTS of rotor rub with them and took a good hour+ or so of tinkering & re-aligning calipers and pads to eliminate it completely. I think next thing I will do is replace brakes with Deore or SLX. I've found with the DB1s they are not great for beach riding and sand gets easily kicked inside the caliper which results in lots of grinding on the pads/rotors. I read from another poster that they actually taped over the opening of the caliper to prevent this. I've yet to take the bike to a man-made trail centre to see how it handles but it's felt great on the natural trails near me. Tubeless is giving me lots more confidence now for long distance/all day rides but will see how it goes when they start trimming back all the hedgerows here.


----------



## Justine29 (Aug 3, 2017)

Hello! 

Which hub did you decide on? My boyfriend is having similar problems with his Farley 7. long story short his hub has disintegrated with only 1200 km on his bike. It is still under warranty. Any suggestions for a better hub that can survive?


----------



## biscut (Sep 11, 2015)

Justine29 said:


> Hello!
> 
> Which hub did you decide on? My boyfriend is having similar problems with his Farley 7. long story short his hub has disintegrated with only 1200 km on his bike. It is still under warranty. Any suggestions for a better hub that can survive?


DT 350 for fatties worth a look.


----------



## akacoke (May 11, 2011)

I recently installed a Manitou mastodon fork on my bike, i had clearance issue with tuning knobs and frame down tube with stock headset

Trek farley 5 in 17.5"/med 
manitou mastodon pro ext 120mm 

after installing the Cane creek/Salsa +3mm base plate part# BAA0855K(ordered from cane creek directly at $11 plus $6.5 shipping). my Farley 5 17.5 barely clear the knobs on the fork with about 0.2mm. A piece of printer paper would get somewhat caught in between. prior installing the +3mm crown race i tried a chris king base plate, and fsa crown race and oem from the bike. all would make 100% contact.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

technically NOT a Trek fat bike but posting here as I know this will interest A LOT of people here: The New 2018 Trek 1120, a Bikepacking Stache - BIKEPACKING.com


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

akacoke said:


> I recently installed a Manitou mastodon fork on my bike, i had clearance issue with tuning knobs and frame down tube with stock headset
> 
> Trek farley 5 in 17.5"/med
> manitou mastodon pro ext 120mm
> ...


What do you think of the Mastodon?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## akacoke (May 11, 2011)

Rideon said:


> What do you think of the Mastodon?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


i dont have a chance to ride it. still need to put the bike together. missing brakes and drive train


----------



## the mayor (Nov 18, 2004)

Rideon said:


> What do you think of the Mastodon?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


There's an entire thread on that fork.....


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

I just picked up a lightly used 2017 Farley 9.6 in size 19.5. 

The previous owner was running a shorter than stock stem on the bike, i just sold my 2016 Farley 7 which had a longer stem, but I forget the length...i think it was 70 or 80 mm?

Can anyone confirm the stock stem length? I need to order a new one. 

Thanks


----------



## Rrknight (Aug 18, 2017)

Swerny said:


> I just picked up a lightly used 2017 Farley 9.6 in size 19.5.
> 
> The previous owner was running a shorter than stock stem on the bike, i just sold my 2016 Farley 7 which had a longer stem, but I forget the length...i think it was 70 or 80 mm?
> 
> ...


I just picked up my 2018 Farley EX 9.8 and it comes with 70mm stem.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Rrknight said:


> I just picked up my 2018 Farley EX 9.8 and it comes with 70mm stem.


thanks!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Swerny said:


> I just picked up a lightly used 2017 Farley 9.6 in size 19.5.
> 
> The previous owner was running a shorter than stock stem on the bike, i just sold my 2016 Farley 7 which had a longer stem, but I forget the length...i think it was 70 or 80 mm?
> 
> ...


I've a 2016 F5 19.5 and it came with an 80mm stem. I'm 6' 1" and was feeling pretty stretched out and getting sore back on longer rides. Put a bulkier 70mm stem on it and it seems about right for me. I couldn't say 100% certain what sizes ship on the higher end 9.x range or 2017 models.


----------



## tmbrown (Jun 9, 2007)

My 2017 9.6 came with a 70mm with a 7 deg rise.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Just raced my 2016 F5 at the weekend for the first time at a 30km XC race. Cannot believe how well this bike performed. I had wanted to spend a bit more time fine tuning the setup/cleaning rotors & dialling in tyre pressure but didn't get round to it. Tubeless makes a HUGE difference to how fast this bike rolls. Went for 7psi front and 9psi rear which was a nice trade-off for speed vs self-steer. Course was very wet, mucky & boggy with long fire road climbs and transitions. Placed 12th out of around 80 riders. I think there was a few other fat bikes racing: a F5, a F9, Scott Big Jon and couple other fat/+bikes I didn't recognise. Almost tempted to enter a CX race....if their rules allow it!


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

My old F5 still going strong :thumbsup:


----------



## tmbrown (Jun 9, 2007)

I need to replace my headset on my Farley 9.6 2017.

Looks like it's a IS41/IS52… I just want to double check with somebody that’s done it already.

I came up with Cane Creek 110 series BAA0768K or 40 series BAA0741K.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

@jpaa Nice. What changes did you make from stock? Is that a 180 rotor up front and different (carbon?) fork? ODI grips, Brooks style saddle and 1x. Just guessing from the pic.


----------



## 288GTO (Aug 17, 2015)

Im in Southern California and just ordered a 2018 Trek Farley EX 9.8. The bike will be used predominantely as my trail and single track bike with occasional use for commuting, adventure riding, and even snow-maybe once a year. Any suggestions for setting up the suspension, air psi, and type of tires to use for type of riding? Im 160-lbs.


----------



## the mayor (Nov 18, 2004)

288GTO said:


> Im in Southern California and just ordered a 2018 Trek Farley EX 9.8. The bike will be used predominantely as my trail and single track bike with occasional use for commuting, adventure riding, and even snow-maybe once a year. Any suggestions for setting up the suspension, air psi, and type of tires to use for type of riding? Im 160-lbs.


I'm 165ish....use Trek's calculator to get you in the ballpark on the shock
I'm running a little stiffer in the rear at 197psi with a Motion Pro digital pump ( all pumps are different..and most fairly inaccurate)
For the fork....the recommendations printed on the fork are way high. I'm running 47 psi on a 120 EXT Pro ( I have not ridden the Comp model)

Buy a good pump and experiment


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Just raced my 2016 F5 at the weekend for the first time at a 30km XC race. Cannot believe how well this bike performed. I had wanted to spend a bit more time fine tuning the setup/cleaning rotors & dialling in tyre pressure but didn't get round to it. Tubeless makes a HUGE difference to how fast this bike rolls. Went for 7psi front and 9psi rear which was a nice trade-off for speed vs self-steer. Course was very wet, mucky & boggy with long fire road climbs and transitions. Placed 12th out of around 80 riders. I think there was a few other fat bikes racing: a F5, a F9, Scott Big Jon and couple other fat/+bikes I didn't recognise. Almost tempted to enter a CX race....if their rules allow it!


I've raced my fat bike at a local CX series and was worried I'd just embarrass myself but the fat bike performed well particularly as the course got more worn in and became more difficult for other riders while the fat bike just kept on going with ease.

John


----------



## Jonboy99 (Jul 18, 2005)

Hmm, I've been waiting for the specs on the 2018s to come out - is it true there is only a 1lb difference between the 9.6 and 9.8 farley? I thought there'd be more with such a big price difference.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

9.8 has lighter wheels and components than the 9.6 but has a dropper which adds some weight back to the bike. 

Sounds about right to me.


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> @jpaa Nice. What changes did you make from stock? Is that a 180 rotor up front and different (carbon?) fork? ODI grips, Brooks style saddle and 1x. Just guessing from the pic.


1x11 Shimano M8000 drivetrain
SRAM chain (works better with Shimano, LOL) 
Absolute Black oval 30T chainring
M8000 XT brakes with 180mm ice tech rotors and metallic pads
Haru Pro fork
Brooks cambium c17 saddle
Carbon handlebar, I don't remember the brand but 20mm rise and 9deg bend
Odi grips
Crank brothers egg beater pedals 
Tubeless with Jumbo JiM 4.8''


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Here's my new to me, 2017 Farley 9.6 with a Lauf Carbonara. Currently set up 29+ with Chupacabra's on Carbonspeed 35mm rims. Carbon seatpost, WTB saddle, Easton EA90 stem, Candy pedals.

Maiden voyage today was great


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Swerny said:


> 9.8 has lighter wheels and components than the 9.6 but has a dropper which adds some weight back to the bike.
> 
> Sounds about right to me.


Eagle gx is heavy too


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Jonboy99 said:


> Hmm, I've been waiting for the specs on the 2018s to come out - is it true there is only a 1lb difference between the 9.6 and 9.8 farley? I thought there'd be more with such a big price difference.


Ditch the dropper and get an xo cassette.


----------



## agurvey (Sep 11, 2017)

I just got the same bike! I love it!


----------



## agurvey (Sep 11, 2017)

Would you have any recommendations on how to carry a full-size spare? It's too big for my seat bag and it takes up my whole gas tank. Looking for recommendations, if you have any. I just purchased a Farley 5 over the weekend and am still getting accustomed to the differences between regular and fat bikes.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

agurvey said:


> Would you have any recommendations on how to carry a full-size spare? It's too big for my seat bag and it takes up my whole gas tank. Looking for recommendations, if you have any. I just purchased a Farley 5 over the weekend and am still getting accustomed to the differences between regular and fat bikes.


Are you asking about a spare tube?

Go tubeless and then carry a DH tube, 27.5 x 2.5 or something like that.

Realistically, a trail side repair for a fat bike tire is going to be an ordeal any way you slice it.

I carry a 29 x 2.3 tube when riding my tubeless 29+ setup


----------



## biscut (Sep 11, 2015)

Coming up dry for a search. I have 16 Farley 7. I realize i can go to 5" tire with 26 rim. BUT can I go to a 27.5 wheel and a 4.5 tire? 

And....I am looking for advice on winter riding. Better to stay with the 26" and 4.8 Snowshoe XL studded I currently have or move to the 27.5 and a 4.5? I picked up my F7 used it came with stock 26" wheels and Barb tires and a set of Snowshoe XL studded for those 26 stock rims. 

I don't see much use for trail with the F7 it will be primarily snow. I have the 16 and ditched looking for 18 as I don't see enough of an upgrade from the 16 to 18. 16 cost me $1400 with both sets of tires that look new. I figured I would wait for IsoSpeed coupler to make it to the Farley line. 

Meantime I'm a fatbike newb with lots of ??


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

the frames and forks are the same between 2016 and 2018 F7, so the wheels will be interchangeable. 

The only difference was the F5 which had a 135 mm fork for 2016, 2017


----------



## agurvey (Sep 11, 2017)

Hi. Thanks for the response. Kind of a newbie, as you can tell. I was totally asking about a spare tube. Thanks. I am actually looking into tubeless now. Thank you for the advice!


----------



## biscut (Sep 11, 2015)

For clarity....im new to fat bike too. The comment about the mountain bike 27.5 2" tube was meant to go inside a tubeless fat bike tire should you be trailside with a flat. Sux but just a means to get you home. A fat bike tube is GIANT!


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Swerny said:


> Are you asking about a spare tube?
> 
> Go tubeless and then carry a DH tube, 27.5 x 2.5 or something like that.
> 
> ...


^ what this guy says. I was using tubes for ages and it is an ordeal. Trust me if you puncture on a fat bike in the middle of nowhere in sub zero temperatures....you may as well as get air-lifted out. Unseating the bead from rim the first time on my F5 was hard as f**k and that was doing it in the warmth of my home. I later punctured in the rain/cold and even though I was carrying a spare it was just easier to call a lift. All joking aside if you want to carry a FULL fat tube for a 5" tyre the best way is with a LARGE Topeak saddle bag (it will fit...just about) or a Camelbak. Either way it's a 400g+ weight penalty you don't want. I've been running tubeless since August. No punctures yet as far as I know. If I was going deep into the wilderness with maybe limited mobile signal I would bring a patch kit and a spare. QTubes are supposed to be decent light spares to carry. Tubeless is the greatest upgrade to any fatbike and everyone here will likely confirm it!


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Whats the offset of the 9.6 chainring? 3 or 6mm? Its dished the wrong was as well right? Im looking at getting a wolf tooth camo SS ring so i dont need to change rings every 3 months...


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

solarplex said:


> Im having a tough time choosing the 7 or 9.6. I want the light weight and carbon frame for winter but then a fork and dropper for summer.
> 
> I might just get a 9.6 and run it stock all winter then buy a mastodon and dropper for it come spring to make a fun trail bike over my speedy top fuel.


I have two 14 Farley's both with bluto's. I purchased a Farley 9.6 and installed the bluto. I can tell you the carbon makes a difference. At the end of a twenty mile ride I still feel fresh or let's be honest and say not as beat up. The carbon absorbs the bumps so much better.

My advise buy the 9.6 you will love it










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## biscut (Sep 11, 2015)

Honest abe...i may be new to FB but I did a few years on the fence. Bought a 2016 F 7 and it's an impressive bike. All snow and ice for my rides so my wanting A carbon 9 wasn't going to get me in a better place. 

If your looking to run winter plus any other season my vote is for the 9.××× whatever u decide and 2 sets of wheels. Recoup some of the front fork weight of suspension. The 7 is pretty responsive in AL so get all you can from the carbon.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Way2ManyBikes said:


> I have two 14 Farley's both with bluto's. I purchased a Farley 9.6 and installed the bluto. I can tell you the carbon makes a difference. At the end of a twenty mile ride I still feel fresh or let's be honest and say not as beat up. The carbon absorbs the bumps so much better.
> 
> My advise buy the 9.6 you will love it
> 
> ...


I did get the 9.6! Im thinking of putting a lauf on it.










I dont have a pic, its sitting at my lbs waiting on a dt 350 for the rear. Ive seen it. Im in no rush as i have 2 other bikes but hola i want it at the same time hahaha. I told them close to Oct ill pick it up tho.


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

solarplex said:


> I did get the 9.6! Im thinking of putting a lauf on it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Love the color and I can't wait to see the Lauf fork on the bike.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Way2ManyBikes said:


> Love the color and I can't wait to see the Lauf fork on the bike.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Ditto. I wish Trek had partnered with Lauf to stick Carbonara's on ALL their fat bikes. I'm still holding out for Lauf to do a more budget conscious fork for those of us who don't want to spend £700 on a fork. I would need to sell a bike to justify that expenditure.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

JohnMcL7 said:


> I've raced my fat bike at a local CX series and was worried I'd just embarrass myself but the fat bike performed well particularly as the course got more worn in and became more difficult for other riders while the fat bike just kept on going with ease.
> 
> John


ALMOST did this this weekend past in the CX MTB Support category. Thankfully I just decided to support my other half who entered in the Womens MTB Support category. Course was super-tough and she could barely even move bike due to thick clay like mud. I'm glad I didn't do it...I think my Farley would've picked up a few extra kg of muck at least and it would have been a nightmare to haul round. Gonna keep an eye though and future races/conditions. May stand more of a chance getting carbon 29er wheelset on it for this sort of thing.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Ditto. I wish Trek had partnered with Lauf to stick Carbonara's on ALL their fat bikes. I'm still holding out for Lauf to do a more budget conscious fork for those of us who don't want to spend £700 on a fork. I would need to sell a bike to justify that expenditure.


In my humble opinion this fork is largely overpriced. Really, I can't see why such simple (by design) fork should cost $1000. I was seriously considering buying it for myself, but the price tag is outrageous. I believe Mastodon Pro will be more reasonable purchase in terms of trail performance and quality of suspension. Of course, if money isn't an obstacle - Carbonara is a great simple fork for sure.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Mebaru said:


> In my humble opinion this fork is largely overpriced. Really, I can't see why such simple (by design) fork should cost $1000. I was seriously considering buying it for myself, but the price tag is outrageous. I believe Mastodon Pro will be more reasonable purchase in terms of trail performance and quality of suspension. Of course, if money isn't an obstacle - Carbonara is a great simple fork for sure.


Totally agree. The appeal to me is the weight and zero maintenance. If they only brought out a cheaper version I am sure their sales would go through the roof. Had a brief look at the Mastodon but really a want a fork that's super light, offers a little travel/compliance and doesn't require me doing anything. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before someone comes up with a cheaper solution. I was actually thinking maybe Lauf are using some of the profits to funnel into design of a carbon leaf spring rear shock. That would be something special to see.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Had a brief look at the Mastodon but really a want a fork that's super light, offers a little travel/compliance and doesn't require me doing anything. I'm sure it's only a matter of time before someone comes up with a cheaper solution.


Very true, light weight and no need of maintenance is great. Design is arguable though, and I read that such forks have poor torsional stiffness - ie having bad performance and control in corners.

I think the price is high because there no competitors. Also I read that Lauf forks are selling pretty good, so we rather not expect the price will drop soon.


----------



## Kirkerik (Apr 21, 2016)

Anyone have a farley frame for sale?


----------



## mxer (May 27, 2006)

Just picked up a 2017 Farley 5. My old budget BD fatty needed a new bb, crank and headset as i also have a mastodon comp on the way. The price for the Farley couldn't be beat so i switched the sram brakes for slx, 180mm front rotor, installed carbon bar, 60mm ritchey stem, thud buster seat post., and sella italia seat.

Now need to build some 27.5 wheels for the 4.5 barbegazi tires.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Pulled those little triangle things from my bike sliding axle. Is that for shipping? Or so you cant move the axle forward?

Running my 2017 9.6 at 4 full turns back from the front, i threw some gorilla tape on the seat tube for protection. Only winter riding so i have no worry of mud but maybe a stuck rock between the lugs....


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

solarplex said:


> Pulled those little triangle things from my bike sliding axle. Is that for shipping? Or so you cant move the axle forward?
> 
> Running my 2017 9.6 at 4 full turns back from the front, i threw some gorilla tape on the seat tube for protection. Only winter riding so i have no worry of mud but maybe a stuck rock between the lugs....


spacers. I put them on the other side of the axle when i run the wheel in the forward position


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

solarplex said:


> Pulled those little triangle things from my bike sliding axle. Is that for shipping? Or so you cant move the axle forward?
> 
> Running my 2017 9.6 at 4 full turns back from the front, i threw some gorilla tape on the seat tube for protection. Only winter riding so i have no worry of mud but maybe a stuck rock between the lugs....


That's where I run my when the bike is in winter mode with the 4.5" Barbegazi tires. I run it tie to the front with the 29+ setup with the Chupacabra's. After 2 years with all 4 season riding I can see some scuff marks on the paint on the back side of the seat tube, but only cosmetic. I've never had anything jam in there to the best of my knowledge.


----------



## butryon (Aug 12, 2005)

Need fat bike help. I own a 9.6 and have enjoyed it. What do people notice different between the carbon bikes v. the aluminum? and also, what about say a 9.6 v an ex 8? other than full squish between the two, is there a large weight difference. I notice being fully rigid starts to make my wrists ache after a few days in a row. Thanks, Ryon


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

butryon said:


> Need fat bike help. I own a 9.6 and have enjoyed it. What do people notice different between the carbon bikes v. the aluminum? and also, what about say a 9.6 v an ex 8? other than full squish between the two, is there a large weight difference. I notice being fully rigid starts to make my wrists ache after a few days in a row. Thanks, Ryon


Carbon 9.6 is much lighter than alu EX 8 - see the weight of both on Trek website, 12.5kg vs 15.5kg. If you have wrist pain due to lack of suspension on hits - you should get a suspension fork, obviously. Otherwise, you should try to optimize your riding position and bike fitting (cockpit, saddle). It may help a lot.


----------



## butryon (Aug 12, 2005)

Thanks Mebaru. I do a lot of ss'ing in the non-snow season and get a little bit of wrist ache but this full rigid seems to make it much more noticeable. I have been thinking that maybe I should try and change the angle of the sweep in my handle bar so that when I take a hit to the bike it uses my elbows more to suck it up v. my wrists..changes my wrist angle, not sure if that makes sense!


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

butryon said:


> Thanks Mebaru. I do a lot of ss'ing in the non-snow season and get a little bit of wrist ache but this full rigid seems to make it much more noticeable. I have been thinking that maybe I should try and change the angle of the sweep in my handle bar so that when I take a hit to the bike it uses my elbows more to suck it up v. my wrists..changes my wrist angle, not sure if that makes sense!


Well, rigid is still rigid, even on fat tires. What terrain you're riding and how fast? Riding fast or aggressively over bumpy, hard terrains on rigid fat is still pretty rough experience.

Also, if you have wrist pain, I can recommend trying Ergon grips, particularly GP3 - they make a lot of difference.


----------



## Kirkerik (Apr 21, 2016)

akacoke said:


> I recently installed a Manitou mastodon fork on my bike, i had clearance issue with tuning knobs and frame down tube with stock headset
> 
> Trek farley 5 in 17.5"/med
> manitou mastodon pro ext 120mm
> ...


I was at the bike shop yesterday checking out the farleys. Look at the bottom of the down tube near the top. Looks like a bumper. Clearance issues for sure.








They also have a Barbegazi on the rear. I thought they were to ship w Gnarwhals F/R. The farley 5's had the same except the small one had a barbegazi F/R. Shortage on the Gnarwhals maybe. I would insist on Gnarwhals if i was picking one up for sure.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Kirkerik said:


> I was at the bike shop yesterday checking out the farleys. Look at the bottom of the down tube near the top. Looks like a bumper. Clearance issues for sure.
> View attachment 1167168
> 
> 
> They also have a Barbegazi on the rear. I thought they were to ship w Gnarwhals F/R. The farley 5's had the same except the small one had a barbegazi F/R. Shortage on the Gnarwhals maybe. I would insist on Gnarwhals if i was picking one up for sure.


Its a sizing issue. The 15.5 and 17.5 cant fit the gnarwhal on it.


----------



## Kirkerik (Apr 21, 2016)

solarplex said:


> Its a sizing issue. The 15.5 and 17.5 cant fit the gnarwhal on it.


Really?! Trek is the one behind the 27.5 FAT movement. You'd think they would design their frames to accomodate their plans. Seems like a FU on treks part.

Wait a min, the rear center is the same across the board on all sizes, is it not? 440mm
Doesn't make sense.


----------



## Kirkerik (Apr 21, 2016)

solarplex said:


> Pulled those little triangle things from my bike sliding axle. Is that for shipping? Or so you cant move the axle forward?
> 
> Running my 2017 9.6 at 4 full turns back from the front, i threw some gorilla tape on the seat tube for protection. Only winter riding so i have no worry of mud but maybe a stuck rock between the lugs....
> 
> ...


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Kirkerik said:


> solarplex said:
> 
> 
> > Pulled those little triangle things from my bike sliding axle. Is that for shipping? Or so you cant move the axle forward?
> ...


----------



## Kirkerik (Apr 21, 2016)

I don't think so. The rear triangle is typically the same on all sizes except for the length of the ST. The farley takes the 2XL i thought.

It appears that there is plenty of room for the Gnarwhal in this pic:


----------



## Kirkerik (Apr 21, 2016)

Here is a closer look at that bumper on the downtube for the crown on the Mastodon:


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Kirkerik said:


> I don't think so. The rear triangle is typically the same on all sizes except for the length of the ST. The farley takes the 2XL i thought.
> 
> It appears that there is plenty of room for the Gnarwhal in this pic:
> View attachment 1167262


By the looks of it its the seat stays. And that changes with the sizing.


----------



## Kirkerik (Apr 21, 2016)

They do, because they are lower on the ST. It could be a limiting factor.

I checked the build spec on trek's site. They have the Barbegazi on the rear even though the pic shows the Gnarwhal.

Still, it might fit. I bet it does.

Worth noting: The 2018 farley frame spec states:

Seat tube angle of 70.5
Hope it's a typo


----------



## Shockwave95 (Dec 30, 2015)

I just bought a new 2017 Farley 7. Change the stem for a Hope FR, handle bar for a Spank 777, ODI grip, Fox Tranfer post, Woolf tooth dropper lever, New SRAM Guide R and 45north tires. This is by far the most fun to ride fat bike that I have tried. Very impressed so far.


----------



## BeerNut (Aug 8, 2013)

Shockwave95 said:


> I just bought a new 2017 Farley 7. Change the stem for a Hope FR, handle bar for a Spank 777, ODI grip, Fox Tranfer post, Woolf tooth dropper lever, New SRAM Guide R and 45north tires. This is by far the most fun to ride fat bike that I have tried. Very impressed so far.


Congrats on the new bike,they are impressive. I got my 2018 farley 5 about a month ago and am lovin' it. The stock brakes are lousy for a 260 lb guy so I'm switching them for some SLX's and bigger, better rotors. Also went with a Sunrace 11-46 cassette,Thomson 100mm x 10 degree stem, Thomson setback seat post and WTB gel seat. This bike will be ridden for a long time.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Anyone change the levels pads to ceramic or metallic? I get a warble.... like a ****ing avid on a fresh squeeze. Once they heat up it goes away


----------



## Shockwave95 (Dec 30, 2015)

BeerNut said:


> Congrats on the new bike,they are impressive. I got my 2018 farley 5 about a month ago and am lovin' it. The stock brakes are lousy for a 260 lb guy so I'm switching them for some SLX's and bigger, better rotors. Also went with a Sunrace 11-46 cassette,Thomson 100mm x 10 degree stem, Thomson setback seat post and WTB gel seat. This bike will be ridden for a long time.


Thanks. I was going to buy the 18 Farley 5 but manage to get a real good deal on the 17, 7.

I am a sold on Shimano brakes also. I don't know where your from but if you ride in cold weather like I, you might have problems with the SLX. Mineral oil does not perform well when cold.


----------



## headwind (Sep 30, 2004)

solarplex said:


> Its a sizing issue. The 15.5 and 17.5 cant fit the gnarwhal on it.


I have a 17.5. And it came with a rear Gnarwhal. The fork clears the bumper. Maybe it's there for a situation like crashing with the fork turned 90 to the frame and all your weight is on it, head first?
I've ridden my bike plenty and crashed a few times. No issues with tire or fork clearance.


----------



## BeerNut (Aug 8, 2013)

Shockwave95 said:


> Thanks. I was going to buy the 18 Farley 5 but manage to get a real good deal on the 17, 7.
> 
> I am a sold on Shimano brakes also. I don't know where your from but if you ride in cold weather like I, you might have problems with the SLX. Mineral oil does not perform well when cold.[/QUO
> 
> I had planned on riding in cooler weather but probably not below 25-30 degrees.At what temp does the mineral oil start causing problems?


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

Which chainring config needs to be on a 2017 Farley? I’d like to find a 32 to replace my 30 (0deg Eagle x-sync)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## krelldog (Feb 17, 2015)

BeerNut said:


> Shockwave95 said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks. I was going to buy the 18 Farley 5 but manage to get a real good deal on the 17, 7.
> ...


----------



## tmbrown (Jun 9, 2007)

Has anybody found a frame bag, that fits a medium 9.6 Farley 2017.


----------



## Treknd (Nov 27, 2017)

I mown both the Trek 9.6 & Trek Fuel EX 8. If I had not pick one, it would be the Trek Fuel EX 8. It has a much better ride & downhill is awesome compared to the Farley 9.6. Both are great bikes but my pick is the EX 8


----------



## Treknd (Nov 27, 2017)

Salsa Bikes makes a bag that fits perfect.


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

I did some updates for my F5:
- Nextie carbon wheels 27.5/65mm & Industry i9 hubs
- Specialized Power saddle
- Bontrager Gnarwhal spike tires
Old updates so far:
- Shimano M8000 brakes & 1x11 (11-42T)
- IceTech 180mm rotors
- Absolut Black oval chainring 30T
- Haru Pro carbon fork
- Crank Brothers egg beater pedals
- Race Face carbon handlebar (20mm rise 8deg)
- Odi grips

The weight in the current setup is 12.6kg (was 14.1kg).


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

Anyone go from Barbegazzis to non-studded Gnarwhals? Riding mostly groomed on belarbegazzis., just got some Gnars. Wondering how much more rolling resistance, maybe run a gnar in the front, barb rear? How much slower will it be or will it make up for it in traction? Thanks!


----------



## drmayer (Apr 19, 2007)

twentyniner29 said:


> Anyone go from Barbegazzis to non-studded Gnarwhals? Riding mostly groomed on belarbegazzis., just got some Gnars. Wondering how much more rolling resistance, maybe run a gnar in the front, barb rear? How much slower will it be or will it make up for it in traction? Thanks!


I put on a set of the 27.5x4,5 gnarwhals. I had the 26x4.7 barbegazis prior. I notice the additional grip of the gnarwhals, but I feel like the roll noticeably slower on the hard packed snow we've had.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

9.6 with next bars and seatpost, studded gnarwhals.

Unreal november. Got warm in dec and melted, then got like -30... then i got sick. Hoping to ride it with the new add ons this weekend.

I changed the pads to metallic, way better and actually dry. Found the resin pads got wet and stayed wet.


----------



## tmbrown (Jun 9, 2007)

twentyniner29 said:


> Anyone go from Barbegazzis to non-studded Gnarwhals? Riding mostly groomed on belarbegazzis., just got some Gnars. Wondering how much more rolling resistance, maybe run a gnar in the front, barb rear? How much slower will it be or will it make up for it in traction? Thanks!


I did one ride with a gnar up front and a barb on the rear, it's not a bad setup, there was about 3 to 4 inches of fresh snow, I was meeting several buddy's for the ride, it was the first snow of the season, and only had a couple hours to install the studs, and tire, so the front was the obvious choice. We did about 16 miles of tight single track, taking turns out front cutting trail, all three of them went down several times, I was the only one that stayed up right. 
The gnar is a night and day difference over the barb up front, I rode all last season with the barb's.
Give it a try, what do you have to lose&#8230; I'm running both the gnar's studded after that ride, we've had some really cold weather, for the last couple of weeks, so it's hard to comment on rolling resistance.


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

tmbrown said:


> I did one ride with a gnar up front and a brab on the rear, it's not a bad setup, there was about 3 to 4 inches of fresh snow, I was meeting several buddy's for the ride, it was the first snow of the season, and only had a couple hours to install the studs, and tire, so the front was the obvious choice. We did about 16 miles of tight single track, taking turns out front cutting trail, all three of them went down several times, I was the only one that stayed up right.
> The gnar is a night and day difference over the barb up front, I rode all last season with the barb's.
> Give it a try, what do you have to lose&#8230; I'm running both the gnar's studded after that ride, we've had some really cold weather, for the last couple of weeks, so it's hard to comment on rolling resistance.


Thanks. Put the Gnar on the front last night. Headed to race in 30 min. -2 right now, feels like -15. 2 hour+ race, 5 mile loop. Should be interesting.


----------



## tmbrown (Jun 9, 2007)

twentyniner29 said:


> Thanks. Put the Gnar on the front last night. Headed to race in 30 min. -2 right now, feels like -15. 2 hour+ race, 5 mile loop. Should be interesting.


Addison Oaks? Good luck, it's was -8 when I got up this morning in Davisburg.


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

tmbrown said:


> Addison Oaks? Good luck, it's was -8 when I got up this morning in Davisburg.


Yup. Thanks! I probably wouldn't go if it wasn't so close to my house. Lol.


----------



## Shockwave95 (Dec 30, 2015)

juste got a BZA combo on special. All I have left to do is make the wheels tubless.


----------



## krelldog (Feb 17, 2015)

drmayer said:


> I put on a set of the 27.5x4,5 gnarwhals. I had the 26x4.7 barbegazis prior. I notice the additional grip of the gnarwhals, but I feel like the roll noticeably slower on the hard packed snow we've had.


Hello, does the 27.5x4.5 gnarwhal fit the RS bluto?


----------



## drmayer (Apr 19, 2007)

krelldog said:


> Hello, does the 27.5x4.5 gnarwhal fit the RS bluto?


No.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Well first ride with the gnarwhals. I didnt notice a big speed difference.... i did put 2 psi each tire more (6/7) than the barbs (4/5)

They were like velcro grip, its pretty icy here and they tackled it no issues, no powder to compare unluckily. 

My only issue is the axle has to be rearmost. Wish i could have got the 3.8” for the rear so i can slam the axle forward. Oh well... its a snowbike.


----------



## Back2MTB (Jun 4, 2014)

so I'm being driven Crazy by the 9587 headset standards in the market today. Can anyone tell me the part number for a crown race replacement for a stock FSA headset on a trek Farley 9?

TIA


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Back2MTB said:


> so I'm being driven Crazy by the 9587 headset standards in the market today.


I know your pain. I had to combine parts from 3 different headsets to put Mastodon fork on my Farley 7 without play.


----------



## fat_biike_boy (Dec 20, 2015)

*Made Hub Adapters 135mm to 150mm is possible on Farley 5*

Hi-
I made hubs for my Farley 5 front wheel to adapt from 135mm to 150mm which allowed me to get the Rock Shox Bluto working with original wheel/hub. Due to the cost pricing of the tooling I made extras. If you need a set to adapt your wheel set let me know and I can help out a fellow fat biker.


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

Trek Farley 5 check


----------



## amadkins (Jun 19, 2008)

Anybody else having issues with paint chipping around the thru axle on the non drive side Haru fork leg? 

Thinking about picking up a maxle to replace the DT RWS thru axle to see if that eliminates it.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

fat_biike_boy said:


> Hi-
> I made hubs for my Farley 5 front wheel to adapt from 135mm to 150mm which allowed me to get the Rock Shox Bluto working with original wheel/hub. Due to the cost pricing of the tooling I made extras. If you need a set to adapt your wheel set let me know and I can help out a fellow fat biker.
> 
> View attachment 1179247
> View attachment 1179248


Cool to see someone doing these! I recall a guy called Steve Hauck did some for some of the other hub brands over at FatBike.com. I'm saving/selling a bike to try and get a hold of a Lauf Carbonara fork but might be interested in a set of these later in the year. I was planning to switch to 29+ wheels but it would be nice to have the option of running the Mulefuts too. How much are you selling them for and would you ship to UK? I'm sure there are loads of folk out there stuck with 135mm hub spacing on F5s and would like to run a Bluto or Mastodon fork. You should post over on fatbike.com to see if there's any interest.


----------



## CrLapp (Sep 13, 2017)

I have a farley 9 and am looking to upgrade the wheelset. I live in eastern pa and I ride mostly rocky single track with a couple little snow rides a year. I am riding the 3.8 minions on the stock jackalope wheels. I was thinking of going with a 27.5 x 60mm wheelset. Does anyone have experience running narrower wheelset for summer riding.
Also does anyone know the weight of the stock wheelset?


----------



## biscut (Sep 11, 2015)

CrLapp said:


> I have a farley 9 and am looking to upgrade the wheelset. I live in eastern pa and I ride mostly rocky single track with a couple little snow rides a year. I am riding the 3.8 minions on the stock jackalope wheels. I was thinking of going with a 27.5 x 60mm wheelset. Does anyone have experience running narrower wheelset for summer riding.
> Also does anyone know the weight of the stock wheelset?


Had a set of Nextie 27.5 60's with Ghar's front and rear built by Mikesee. Can't answer the summer question as I don't do fatty other than winter. Studded in winter they do gr8! I am also running a 2016 Farley 9.


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

CrLapp said:


> I have a farley 9 and am looking to upgrade the wheelset. I live in eastern pa and I ride mostly rocky single track with a couple little snow rides a year. I am riding the 3.8 minions on the stock jackalope wheels. I was thinking of going with a 27.5 x 60mm wheelset. Does anyone have experience running narrower wheelset for summer riding.
> Also does anyone know the weight of the stock wheelset?


Do you plan to run the same 3.8 width tires? I would think the 60mm rim is kind of narrow. IMO, you'll need to up the tire pressure to compensate for the narrower rim to keep it from rolling too much. Raising the tire pressure IMO defeats the purpose of fat tires.
I run the stock 80mm rims on 9.6 as well as the new 82mm Nextie 27.5 rims, but only use this for winter. I also have the bike setup with 29+ with 52mm wide Nextie rims and 3.0 tires for the spring/summer/fall. I really like this combination.


----------



## CrLapp (Sep 13, 2017)

JackP42 said:


> Do you plan to run the same 3.8 width tires? I would think the 60mm rim is kind of narrow. IMO, you'll need to up the tire pressure to compensate for the narrower rim to keep it from rolling too much. Raising the tire pressure IMO defeats the purpose of fat tires.
> I run the stock 80mm rims on 9.6 as well as the new 82mm Nextie 27.5 rims, but only use this for winter. I also have the bike setup with 29+ with 52mm wide Nextie rims and 3.0 tires for the spring/summer/fall. I really like this combination.


I like the 27.5 x 3.8 tires. I also thought about 29+ but didn't know how much different the 29+ would ride compared to 27.5 fat.


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

CrLapp said:


> I like the 27.5 x 3.8 tires. I also thought about 29+ but didn't know how much different the 29+ would ride compared to 27.5 fat.


If you prefer to stick with 27.5x3.8, I would recommend the NXT27WD85-II rims over the narrower ones. A few grams heavier, but worth it for better supporting the tire. BTW, my wheels built with these rims, I9 hubs, D-Light Sapim spokes and aluminum nipples came in a 2140g including valve stems and rim tape. My 29+ wheels came in around 1950g if I recall correct. If I recall correct, the stock aluminum Jackalope wheelset is about 3000g.
In terms of 29+ vs fat, I think fat rules in the winter, but when the snow is gone, I prefer the 29+. Better handling, no self steer, better rolling, faster accelerating, and only a slight loss in traction unless you are something like beach sand. If max grip is what you are after though, can't beat the fat setup.


----------



## Dynomite (Oct 17, 2007)

I have a Farly 7 and love it. The hub engagement sucks though. Other bikes are running DT with a very quick engagements. What are my options for upgrading the XD driver? Thinking about getting a Farly 9.6 but same shitty XD driver.


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Dynomite said:


> I have a Farly 7 and love it. The hub engagement sucks though. Other bikes are running DT with a very quick engagements. What are my options for upgrading the XD driver? Thinking about getting a Farly 9.6 but same shitty XD driver.


I would think you'd need to replace the whole rear hub, not just the XD driver. I would think they would not be cross compatible between brands, at least with brands that have faster engagement as half of the engagement system is in the hub and the other half is in the freehub/driver.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Just speccing up some gear for going 29+ on my 2016 F5. I'm thinking RaceFace/Easton ARC 40 or 45 Rims, Hope Fatsno Hubs, spokes TBC, and 3" 29+ Chupacabra tyres. My preference is the 40mm rim to keep weight down. Had looked at carbon rims briefly but the ARC is supposed to be very good and light enough for my use. Any others done the 29+ conversion on their Farley care to share their thoughts?


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Just speccing up some gear for going 29+ on my 2016 F5. I'm thinking RaceFace/Easton ARC 40 or 45 Rims, Hope Fatsno Hubs, spokes TBC, and 3" 29+ Chupacabra tyres. My preference is the 40mm rim to keep weight down. Had looked at carbon rims briefly but the ARC is supposed to be very good and light enough for my use. Any others done the 29+ conversion on their Farley care to share their thoughts?


I have a 9.6 that I run fat and rigid in the winter, and then put 29+ wheels and a Magnum fork on it for the spring/summer/fall.
I'm very happy with the bike in both configurations.
The 29+ wheelset I built was I9 hubs, Nextie Jungle Fox rims (52 outside, 45 inside, 530g), Sapim D-Light spokes (I really like these spokes) and aluminum nipples, and Chupacabra tires. I'm happy with these wheels, and have been bullet proof for the 2 seasons I've run them. I very much favour wide rims to so that lower tire pressures can be used without the tire rolling over. IMO, if you are going +, you are looking for the added grip over conventional tires, and this is sacrificed to some degree if you go too narrow on the rim. I think the 45 inside rims and the 3.0 Chupacabra's are a good match. Not too wide that you are rubbing the side walls, but good support. BTW I weight 200 lbs and run 11psi front/13psi back with these wheels and tires.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

JackP42 said:


> I have a 9.6 that I run fat and rigid in the winter, and then put 29+ wheels and a Magnum fork on it for the spring/summer/fall.
> I'm very happy with the bike in both configurations.
> The 29+ wheelset I built was I9 hubs, Nextie Jungle Fox rims (52 outside, 45 inside, 530g), Sapim D-Light spokes (I really like these spokes) and aluminum nipples, and Chupacabra tires. I'm happy with these wheels, and have been bullet proof for the 2 seasons I've run them. I very much favour wide rims to so that lower tire pressures can be used without the tire rolling over. IMO, if you are going +, you are looking for the added grip over conventional tires, and this is sacrificed to some degree if you go too narrow on the rim. I think the 45 inside rims and the 3.0 Chupacabra's are a good match. Not too wide that you are rubbing the side walls, but good support. BTW I weight 200 lbs and run 11psi front/13psi back with these wheels and tires.


cool thankyou! I may opt for the 45 ARCs then. I'll admit I bought the Farley on impulse. We have very little snow here but I do some beach but mostly XC riding and take the Farley to trail centres. Ideally I want to put a Lauf fork on the front and use it in 29+ for long adventure and XC rides. I love riding the 4.7" Barbegazis and they do soak up everything but would like to make the bike a bit more nimble. My only other issue is the 135mm front hub but once I get the Lauf that won't be a problem anymore. Any issues with the sidewalls on the Chupas? I've read some reports of it being weak or tearing.


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> cool thankyou! I may opt for the 45 ARCs then. I'll admit I bought the Farley on impulse. We have very little snow here but I do some beach but mostly XC riding and take the Farley to trail centres. Ideally I want to put a Lauf fork on the front and use it in 29+ for long adventure and XC rides. I love riding the 4.7" Barbegazis and they do soak up everything but would like to make the bike a bit more nimble. My only other issue is the 135mm front hub but once I get the Lauf that won't be a problem anymore. Any issues with the sidewalls on the Chupas? I've read some reports of it being weak or tearing.


I have not tried 29+ with anything other than these rims, but I have tried a lot of different width rims with tires in the 2.35 to 2.6 range, and IMO there is an optimum. Slower riding where traction is king, wide is better up to the point where the side ways bulge beyond the tread. At speed picks up, the tire needs more stability, so you may be forced to run higher pressures, but again, a wide rim supports a tire better than a narrow rim at a given pressure.
I've had zero issues with my Chupacabra's and I everything from XC racing to extremely rocky trails, though the rocks tend to be rounded more so than sharp. More challenging for grip, but likely a bit easier of the tires.


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

CrLapp said:


> I have a farley 9 and am looking to upgrade the wheelset. I live in eastern pa and I ride mostly rocky single track with a couple little snow rides a year. I am riding the 3.8 minions on the stock jackalope wheels. I was thinking of going with a 27.5 x 60mm wheelset. Does anyone have experience running narrower wheelset for summer riding.
> Also does anyone know the weight of the stock wheelset?


I have the Farley 9.6 with the Nextie Black Eagle II 65mm/27.5'' carbon wheelset and the Barbegazi 4.5''/27.5'' tires. Summer is not here yet but the setup is just perfect! Narrower wheelset makes the tire to be rounder profile so it reduces self steering. Narrow wheel seems to be quite well protected by the tire so I bet the setup works like a dream in summer time. One thing I really need to say is that I can set the tire pressure higher than with the wider aluminum wheelset. I mean I don't have 'hard hitting' feeling when going over holes like on the winter trail where people are walking and making holes. Usually I need to setup the air pressure down but not with my new setup. It's amazing how I'm able to drive even with the higher pressure and having great quality of driving without bouncing around. Higher air pressure is very welcome because better rolling. The bike feels like super fast when comparing to my old setup. I love it so my recommendation for you is to go for 65mm or 60mm. Here's the pic...


----------



## Jason P Tolmie (Mar 14, 2018)

*Damaged derailleur on 2018 Trek Farley 5*

Hi there, I'm new to this forum and hope I have posted in the right place. I am from the UK (Outer Hebrides) & very recently purchased a 2018 Trek Farley 5 & on my first proper ride managed to catch the derailleur on a tuft of earth where it dug in a little. I couldn't see any obvious damage but straight away the gears wouldn't index properly & upon trying to adjust them only seems to have made them worse. I'm not the best at adjusting gears but think maybe I have damaged it beyond repair. My question is would it be better to repair it or just replace it? Also, would it be better to replace with the same (Shimano Deore M6000, Shadow Plus) or upgrade to a better derailleur? And, will most derailleurs fit straight on?

Also, another question; I have yet to go tubeless and would appreciate a list of things I will need to achieve this.

I appreciate your help very much.

Jason


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Jason P Tolmie said:


> Hi there, I'm new to this forum and hope I have posted in the right place. I am from the UK (Outer Hebrides) & very recently purchased a 2018 Trek Farley 5 & on my first proper ride managed to catch the derailleur on a tuft of earth where it dug in a little. I couldn't see any obvious damage but straight away the gears wouldn't index properly & upon trying to adjust them only seems to have made them worse. I'm not the best at adjusting gears but think maybe I have damaged it beyond repair. My question is would it be better to repair it or just replace it? Also, would it be better to replace with the same (Shimano Deore M6000, Shadow Plus) or upgrade to a better derailleur? And, will most derailleurs fit straight on?
> 
> Also, another question; I have yet to go tubeless and would appreciate a list of things I will need to achieve this.
> 
> ...


You may have just bent the derailleur hanger, a shop can easily fix this.

For tubeless with the Mulefut rims, the best way is to buy the Sun Ringle rim strips as well as tubeless valves and sealant.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Just speccing up some gear for going 29+ on my 2016 F5. I'm thinking RaceFace/Easton ARC 40 or 45 Rims, Hope Fatsno Hubs, spokes TBC, and 3" 29+ Chupacabra tyres. My preference is the 40mm rim to keep weight down. Had looked at carbon rims briefly but the ARC is supposed to be very good and light enough for my use. Any others done the 29+ conversion on their Farley care to share their thoughts?


there's lots of them in this thread:

http://forums.mtbr.com/26-27-5-29-plus-bikes/lets-see-your-fatbike-29-plus-conversions-955584.html

I personally run XMCarbonspeed 35 MM internal rims with Novatec hubs and Chupacabras.

2 seasons of use and love the setup.


----------



## Jason P Tolmie (Mar 14, 2018)

Thanks very much for your advice. Much appreiated.


----------



## simojoki (Oct 13, 2008)

Got my 2018 9.6 few weeks ago. I guess the ones we got here to Oulu, Northern Finland are the only ones in the whole Europe 
Changed the brakes and cockpit parts - and of course set it to single speed from the day one. Next upgrade will be the carbon wheels.
I put the 11spd GX gearing and Level T brakes to my girlfriends 2018 Farley 5.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Swerny said:


> You may have just bent the derailleur hanger, a shop can easily fix this.
> 
> For tubeless with the Mulefut rims, the best way is to buy the Sun Ringle rim strips as well as tubeless valves and sealant.


Totally agree with this. First time round I tried to set my Mulefuts up "cheap" with gaffer/duct tape. It was a mistake. Best to get the Sunringle tape (think it comes up 78mm for 80mm rims). I used regular Stans and a couple of Airwave tubeless valves (£10). Still holding air 1 year later although have topped up sealant. Make sure you follow all the steps correctly...including inflating tyre with a tube first to seat it the bead to the rim. I actually took mine to a mechanic friend who had done a lot of racing tubeless setups and he did a great job. One thing you also might find useful is a compressor or Airshot: Airshot Tubeless Tyre Inflator


----------



## CrLapp (Sep 13, 2017)

Has anyone converted there farley to 27.5+? Or does everyone run 29+? I want to get a summer wheelset for here in the northeast. I just wasn't sure if 27.5+ would drop the bb height to low. Also would 29+ feel to big for singletrack use. It seems like 29+ is the choice of bikepackers.


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

CrLapp said:


> Has anyone converted there farley to 27.5+? Or does everyone run 29+? I want to get a summer wheelset for here in the northeast. I just wasn't sure if 27.5+ would drop the bb height to low. Also would 29+ feel to big for singletrack use. It seems like 29+ is the choice of bikepackers.


I run my Farley 9.6 with 29+ and a 100mm Magnum fork for the spring/summer/fall. I ride everything from extremely rocky trails to traditional XC races on it. It's an awesome all rounder do everything bike IMO. I haven't tried it, but would think the BB would end up pretty low with 27.5+. I guess it would depend on the crank length you run, what kind of trails you ride, and since + tire sizes vary a lot, what tires.


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

Any links for a derailleur hanger? 2016 Trek Farely 7.


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

JackP42 said:


> I run my Farley 9.6 with 29+ and a 100mm Magnum fork for the spring/summer/fall. I ride everything from extremely rocky trails to traditional XC races on it. It's an awesome all rounder do everything bike IMO. I haven't tried it, but would think the BB would end up pretty low with 27.5+. I guess it would depend on the crank length you run, what kind of trails you ride, and since + tire sizes vary a lot, what tires.


Which 29+ tire and rim setup?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Rideon said:


> Which 29+ tire and rim setup?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Nextie Jungle Fox + 52 outside/45 inside carbon rims on I9 hubs with 29+ 3.0 Chupacabra tires set up tubeless.


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

JackP42 said:


> Nextie Jungle Fox + 52 outside/45 inside carbon rims on I9 hubs with 29+ 3.0 Chupacabra tires set up tubeless.


How does it compare to 27.5 x 4? (Non winter conditions of course)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JackP42 (Nov 16, 2007)

Rideon said:


> How does it compare to 27.5 x 4? (Non winter conditions of course)
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The wheels and tires are about 1kg less, so as expected they accelerate quicker. They are slightly larger in diameter, but not that I notice this. From there, the comparison is a little harder since I run the 29+ with a suspension fork and the 27.5 fat fully rigid. The fat setup has slightly better traction in slow situation, and as the speed picks up, the balance slightly shifts the other way, but splitting hairs. That is on hard pack and rocking trails. I don't ride a lot of soft sandy trails where the fat likely is better. For me, the fat wins in the snow, but the 29+ seems a better compromise for the spring/summer/fall for the type of trails I typically ride.


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

JackP42 said:


> The wheels and tires are about 1kg less, so as expected they accelerate quicker. They are slightly larger in diameter, but not that I notice this. From there, the comparison is a little harder since I run the 29+ with a suspension fork and the 27.5 fat fully rigid. The fat setup has slightly better traction in slow situation, and as the speed picks up, the balance slightly shifts the other way, but splitting hairs. That is on hard pack and rocking trails. I don't ride a lot of soft sandy trails where the fat likely is better. For me, the fat wins in the snow, but the 29+ seems a better compromise for the spring/summer/fall for the type of trails I typically ride.


Makes sense. I started riding 29 x 2.6 on 36mm internal Nox rims last summer on my dual squish bike and loved it. Superior traction rules the day. Though I love my Farley winter setup too. Good to have options.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## toukoq84 (Oct 31, 2015)

Does it work jumbojim 4.8 farley 5 -16?


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

I've a 2016 Farley 5 and about to replace chain & cassette. Just wondering what the options are for going 1x10. I think the rear mech is a Deore M615 Shadow+ GS or SGS (not 100% on this). I've heard there's a 11-42 Shimano HG500 Cassette out now but not sure this would work with my rear mech properly. Only interested in Shimano options as would hope to keep rear mech and shifter. The current config is a 2x10 with 11-36 out back and Race Face 36/22 up front. Likely I would be swapping that for a 28T or 30T. Also hoping to go 29+ later in year but I don't think wheel size would affect this setup. Keen to see what some of you others have gone for on your Farleys. Thanks


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> I've a 2016 Farley 5 and about to replace chain & cassette. Just wondering what the options are for going 1x10. I think the rear mech is a Deore M615 Shadow+ GS or SGS (not 100% on this). I've heard there's a 11-42 Shimano HG500 Cassette out now but not sure this would work with my rear mech properly. Only interested in Shimano options as would hope to keep rear mech and shifter. The current config is a 2x10 with 11-36 out back and Race Face 36/22 up front. Likely I would be swapping that for a 28T or 30T. Also hoping to go 29+ later in year but I don't think wheel size would affect this setup. Keen to see what some of you others have gone for on your Farleys. Thanks


For anyone interested in doing this I think it CAN be done with a Deore M615 Shadow + GS by using a Wolf Tooth "Goat link". Not sure about the SGS (long cage) mech. The mechs were only rated to go to 36T on the largest sprocket. You can also use a larger B limit screw but from what I've read that doesn't seem to be as successful. I may buy the stuff and pass to my bike mechanic friend who is a lot more skilled than me at these things. I'll post back here if it's been successful.


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

2016 Farley 7 any try 27.5 plus x 3.0 wheels on one? How much if any did the BB drop? Right now running 26 x 4.7 Bulldozers.


----------



## biscut (Sep 11, 2015)

No 3.0's but I did recently get a 27.5 wheelset - Duroc 50 with 3.8 Hodag's. I feel zero difference in height and love em over the wider tires for summertime.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

RockyJo1 said:


> 2016 Farley 7 any try 27.5 plus x 3.0 wheels on one? How much if any did the BB drop? Right now running 26 x 4.7 Bulldozers.


I've tried them with 27.5 x 2.8 and 29 x 3. I didn't care for the lower bike but all my interest is in roll over rock and snow performance. The 27.5 x 2.8 owner felt just the opposite and uses that for XC races and gravel rides.


----------



## cableman (Jul 8, 2018)

Picked up a used 2017 farley 7 for 1k, nice bike!
The front brake is an sram guide R and the rear is the stock sram level tl. I like the way the guide lever works better, the tl seems to not return back as well. It releases the pads but feels sluggish on the return not quick like the guide if that makes any sence.
Aside from that my ocd hates 2 different levers lol
Can i just upgrade to the guide R lever or just get the whole setup?


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

RockyJo1 said:


> 2016 Farley 7 any try 27.5 plus x 3.0 wheels on one? How much if any did the BB drop? Right now running 26 x 4.7 Bulldozers.


IIRC you'll drop over 1/2" with that swap, assuming a real 3.0" tire.


----------



## cableman (Jul 8, 2018)

Anyone know what cable i would need for the sram gx shifter on a farly 7? Not sure what the thickness is and cant find that on their site.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

cableman said:


> Anyone know what cable i would need for the sram gx shifter on a farly 7? Not sure what the thickness is and cant find that on their site.


You mean inner cable or outer shell? Any standard shifting kit will work - 1.2-1.6mm cable with 4-5mm outer shell.


----------



## cableman (Jul 8, 2018)

Mebaru said:


> You mean inner cable or outer shell? Any standard shifting kit will work - 1.2-1.6mm cable with 4-5mm outer shell.


Yup the inner cable, its got a couple of broken strands before the lock down bolt on derailer.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

cableman said:


> Yup the inner cable, its got a couple of broken strands before the lock down bolt on derailer.


As I wrote above, any 1.2mm-1.6mm shifting cable will work. SRAM SlickWire MTB is great quality kit.


----------



## cableman (Jul 8, 2018)

Mebaru said:


> You mean inner cable or outer shell? Any standard shifting kit will work - 1.2-1.6mm cable with 4-5mm outer shell.





Mebaru said:


> As I wrote above, any 1.2mm-1.6mm shifting cable will work. SRAM SlickWire MTB is great quality kit.


Awesome thanks.
Also any chance you would know if i can run a guide brake lever on a tl caliper?


----------



## BlueCheesehead (Jul 17, 2010)

For best shifting results replace the housing along with the cable. The inside of the housing wears too.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

cableman said:


> Awesome thanks.
> Also any chance you would know if i can run a guide brake lever on a tl caliper?


Sorry, don't know. Guide R and Level TL brakes are using same technologies, so in theory they probably may work together.

Why would you do it?


----------



## cableman (Jul 8, 2018)

Mebaru said:


> Sorry, don't know. Guide R and Level TL brakes are using same technologies, so in theory they probably may work together.
> 
> Why would you do it?


Guy i bought bike from swapped out the front brakes to the guide series, the rear stock tl series is having the stuck lever problem. So i figure why not just install a guide lever for the rear so they match and feel the same! 
Im gonna ask my lbs about the whole recall thing on these levers and see what he can do.


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

Wampa wheel question. Does the wampa freehub have room to add 3 more pawls (go from 54 to 108 poe) ? I have the part numbers for the pawls and springs, just haven’t had the time to take mine apart yet to investigate. Thanks in advance!


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

twentyniner29 said:


> Wampa wheel question. Does the wampa freehub have room to add 3 more pawls (go from 54 to 108 poe) ? I have the part numbers for the pawls and springs, just haven't had the time to take mine apart yet to investigate. Thanks in advance!


If it is off the 2019 red 9.8 with rapid drive hubs.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

solarplex said:


> If it is off the 2019 red 9.8 with rapid drive hubs.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Mine has the 2016 Wampas.


----------



## Bills (Jun 13, 2009)

Just picked up a Farley 7 2018 with the manitou fork. Does anyone use quick release hubs on these or is there a reason why they are not using them? Went on my first ride today, but when I take a bike to work I like to remove the front wheel and have it in the cab of my truck while I’m working, then on the rack after the ride.

Probably not hard to carry the tools to remove the wheel, but just wondering if there is an QR axle option also.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Bills said:


> Just picked up a Farley 7 2018 with the manitou fork. Does anyone use quick release hubs on these or is there a reason why they are not using them? Went on my first ride today, but when I take a bike to work I like to remove the front wheel and have it in the cab of my truck while I'm working, then on the rack after the ride.
> 
> Probably not hard to carry the tools to remove the wheel, but just wondering if there is an QR axle option also.


https://www.ebay.com/p/RockShox-Rear-Maxle-Lite-150mm-X-12mm-Black/1200098614

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

twentyniner29 said:


> Mine has the 2016 Wampas.


Its the old style hubs. Not able to make 6 pawl.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DubzOxford (Nov 9, 2012)

Started "Fat biking" in 2011 with a Pugsley. The Pugs was by far the best bike I have ridden in a long time. It felt great, did everything and more for me, and thought I would never find a better bike. Well, I was wrong. I purchased a used 9.6 and WOW this bike is amazing. Looking forward to the winter to see how the 27.5 tires work compared to the 26" I rode for so long. With some new Carbon hoops and DT 350 hub wheels in the making, hoping to get this bad boy down below 26lbs. Also, can anyone recommend a replacement crankset for the Farley. Want to go carbon soon.


----------



## biscut (Sep 11, 2015)

DubzOxford said:


> Started "Fat biking" in 2011 with a Pugsley. The Pugs was by far the best bike I have ridden in a long time. It felt great, did everything and more for me, and thought I would never find a better bike. Well, I was wrong. I purchased a used 9.6 and WOW this bike is amazing. Looking forward to the winter to see how the 27.5 tires work compared to the 26" I rode for so long. With some new Carbon hoops and DT 350 hub wheels in the making, hoping to get this bad boy down below 26lbs. Also, can anyone recommend a replacement crankset for the Farley. Want to go carbon soon.
> View attachment 1223341


I picked up a16 Farley 7 and made some of the same upgrades. Went DT 350 on Nextie and find the 27.5 great for northeast winter.

Just my opinion but I wouldn't go carbon cranks especially Race Face...they tend not to last. I just removed a set that has a lot of play. I'll see if I can post video. Unless your racing...

I'm running the heavy Eagle GX on both my Farley's and it's not noticeable to me.


----------



## DubzOxford (Nov 9, 2012)

biscut said:


> I picked up a16 Farley 7 and made some of the same upgrades. Went DT 350 on Nextie and find the 27.5 great for northeast winter.
> 
> Just my opinion but I wouldn't go carbon cranks especially Race Face...they tend not to last. I just removed a set that has a lot of play. I'll see if I can post video. Unless your racing...
> 
> I'm running the heavy Eagle GX on both my Farley's and it's not noticeable to me.


Thanks for your thoughts on the carbon cranks. Did you upgrade the rear cassette? I was thinking of going to XG-1195 or 1199 to save a little weight.


----------



## biscut (Sep 11, 2015)

DubzOxford said:


> Thanks for your thoughts on the carbon cranks. Did you upgrade the rear cassette? I was thinking of going to XG-1195 or 1199 to save a little weight.


I picked up the Eagle GX as a set on Amazon for $450 ish and did not change the cassette. For that bike I don't see the need and can't justify the added $$. If anything I'd drop the 4cell Glowworm battery/light combo and save a lot more weight.


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

I want a carbon Farley frame so bad.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

For anyone who converted their Farley to 29+ what forks did you use? I'm stuck with a 135mm Farley fork but wanted to get the Haru carbon....however it's now discontinued. The do a Bowie 29+ fork with 100mm spacing but not sure how that would work. Also, looking at 29+ suspension options but they are all 110 Boost. Disappointed Trek have trashed the Haru.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

i used the stock Haru that came with my Farley 7 and Farley 9.6. 

Trek is still selling it OEM, check the classifieds for someone who has upgraded to a Mastodon or Bluto.


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Swerny said:


> i used the stock Haru that came with my Farley 7 and Farley 9.6.
> 
> Trek is still selling it OEM, check the classifieds for someone who has upgraded to a Mastodon or Bluto.


Hey Swerny. You've probably seen me bombarding the forum with these questions! What year are your 7 and 9.6 and that Haru was fine for 29+? Each time I've asked Trek all they will say is it fits 26" and 27.5. I've tried looking for people offloading them on ebay etc. but no luck.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

cr3anmachin3 said:


> Hey Swerny. You've probably seen me bombarding the forum with these questions! What year are your 7 and 9.6 and that Haru was fine for 29+? Each time I've asked Trek all they will say is it fits 26" and 27.5. I've tried looking for people offloading them on ebay etc. but no luck.


I had a 2016 Farley 7 and i have a 2017 Farley 9.6

What year is your Farley and do you have the stock fork?

Edit: looks like you have a Farley 5 with the 135 mm fork, not sure if it will fit 29+ but have a look through this thread:

http://forums.mtbr.com/26-27-5-29-plus-bikes/lets-see-your-fatbike-29-plus-conversions-955584-4.html

Here's pics of my old F7 with the stock fork and 29+


----------



## skinl19 (Jan 27, 2004)

Hey! You've got gears! 



DubzOxford said:


> Started "Fat biking" in 2011 with a Pugsley. The Pugs was by far the best bike I have ridden in a long time. It felt great, did everything and more for me, and thought I would never find a better bike. Well, I was wrong. I purchased a used 9.6 and WOW this bike is amazing. Looking forward to the winter to see how the 27.5 tires work compared to the 26" I rode for so long. With some new Carbon hoops and DT 350 hub wheels in the making, hoping to get this bad boy down below 26lbs. Also, can anyone recommend a replacement crankset for the Farley. Want to go carbon soon.
> View attachment 1223341


----------



## DubzOxford (Nov 9, 2012)

skinl19 said:


> Hey! You've got gears!


Shhhhhhhhh....don't tell anyone.:nono:


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

Swerny said:


> I had a 2016 Farley 7 and i have a 2017 Farley 9.6
> 
> What year is your Farley and do you have the stock fork?
> 
> ...


Yep. On the F5 with stock fork. I'm pretty sure it will fit 29+ but I don't want wheels built to 135/197 hubs. Doubt I would be able to get rid of them and prefer a couple of Hope Fatsno hubs. Tried to get the F7 when they came out but my Trek dealer said he couldn't get the 7 in the UK. No idea why they didn't make them available over here as the purple looks awesome. If Prince had a fat bike....


----------



## 9GUY9 (Jul 14, 2007)

I have been strongly thinking of buying a Farley 7 top replace my Salsa Blackborow. I demoed a 19.5" Farley 5 today. I was surprised and a bit let down to learn the axle could not be slid all the way forward with the stock 27.5x4.5 Gnarwhal. The axle had to be set about half the adjustment range back to give a few mm of clearance between the tire and the seat tube. For poops and giggles I threw the Gnarwhal tire/wheel combo in my Blackborow. it fit perfectly fine in my Salsa with the chainstays in the shortest position (440mm).

Is anyone running a similar 27.5x4.5 tire that is slightly smaller and allows the sliders to be set all the way forward?


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

9GUY9 said:


> Is anyone running a similar 27.5x4.5 tire that is slightly smaller and allows the sliders to be set all the way forward?


IIRC, the Barbegazi fits with the wheel all the way forward, but it's very tight.

I haven't tried running it like that and usually slide it back for more clearance and stability.

I will be switching wheelsets this weekend with the 29+ setup coming off, i'll try it and snap some photos.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Swerny said:


> IIRC, the Barbegazi fits with the wheel all the way forward, but it's very tight.
> 
> I haven't tried running it like that and usually slide it back for more clearance and stability.
> 
> I will be switching wheelsets this weekend with the 29+ setup coming off, i'll try it and snap some photos.












Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DubzOxford (Nov 9, 2012)

With the new wheelset and a few other upgrades, got the 9.6 to 25.0lbs with XTR pedals. The bike is so much more fun with the lighter wheels.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

DubzOxford said:


> With the new wheelset and a few other upgrades, got the 9.6 to 25.0lbs with XTR pedals. The bike is so much more fun with the lighter wheels.


What wheels?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DubzOxford (Nov 9, 2012)

27.5 carbon rims by lightbicycle, DT SWISS spokes and 350 hubs. Total weight for the set was under 2100 grams. This is my second set of Lightbicycle rims. First set are still running solid on my Pugs with over 7,000 miles. Great company to work with.


----------



## CanuckMountainMan (Oct 29, 2018)

Those are sexy wheels!

I'm looking for a second set of wheels to setup for tubeless next Spring
Currently running 27.5" Studded Gnarwhals/Mulefut on my Farley 7 (with tubes) for my Winter setup

How do you like the Barbs' ?


----------



## DubzOxford (Nov 9, 2012)

IMO the Barbs are some of the best trail tires I have used. Past tires I have used, Jumbo Jim’s, Husker Du’s, Nate’s, Juggernauts, Larry’s, Knards, I’m sure I forgot 1 or 2. Yes, the JJ’s roll extremely well, but I have way more confidence with the Barbs. I have heard nothing but good things about the Barbs in the winter from other Farley owners. Looking forward to our Monday snow storm.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

CanuckMountainMan said:


> Those are sexy wheels!
> 
> I'm looking for a second set of wheels to setup for tubeless next Spring
> Currently running 27.5" Studded Gnarwhals/Mulefut on my Farley 7 (with tubes) for my Winter setup
> ...


Their fast but if you dont need the float i would go narrower to the hodag.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CanuckMountainMan (Oct 29, 2018)

I already bought a second set of Gnar's (Black Friday sale 20%off) $160 down to $127 (CAD$)

...I really love the traction and was willing to give up a little rolling resistance for more "bite"
I'm not a racer so traction>speed for me, and now that mine are Studded they are unstoppable for Winter riding.

But I may have to test ride the Barb's on one of my Dealers 2019 Demo Farley's
just to see the difference for myself on the Dirt next Spring.
My 2018 Farley 7 came with Gnarwhals front and back, 
and wondered why the 2019's came with a Gnar on the front and a Barb on the back.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

CanuckMountainMan said:


> I already bought a second set of Gnar's (Black Friday sale 20%off) $160 down to $127 (CAD$)
> 
> ...I really love the traction and was willing to give up a little rolling resistance for more "bite"
> I'm not a racer so traction>speed for me, and now that mine are Studded they are unstoppable for Winter riding.
> ...


The 15.5 and 17.5 did for clearance issues. Where the 19.5 and 21.5 came gnar front and rear.

They do also change tires because of supply issues... so there could be that.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## CanuckMountainMan (Oct 29, 2018)

solarplex said:


> The 15.5 and 17.5 did for clearance issues. Where the 19.5 and 21.5 came gnar front and rear.
> 
> They do also change tires because of supply issues... so there could be that.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Ahhh, that explains it!

I was in the shop yesterday to pick up my studs and saw a 2019 F7 with Gnars Front and Rear,
(Yes it was a 19.5) My 2018 F7 is a 19.5 that felt HUGE at first coming off my 26x2.0 Marin trail bike.
...but its All Good Now!

I put a Bontrager 125mm Line Dropper on as my first mod, 
A luxury I could afford since my F7 was a Demo that was marked down by $1200 :eekster:

The seat and the handle bars are SO much higher, but the stand-over is exactly the same as my old Marin,
With the Bigger Tires and twice the front suspension travel (Rockshox Judy vs Manitou Mastodon)
I love just rolling over obstacles now that I used to bunny hop to clear.


----------



## tmbrown (Jun 9, 2007)

DubzOxford said:


> IMO the Barbs are some of the best trail tires I have used. Past tires I have used, Jumbo Jim's, Husker Du's, Nate's, Juggernauts, Larry's, Knards, I'm sure I forgot 1 or 2. Yes, the JJ's roll extremely well, but I have way more confidence with the Barbs. I have heard nothing but good things about the Barbs in the winter from other Farley owners. Looking forward to our Monday snow storm.


Yep, the Barbs are a pretty well rounded tire, for our local conditions, but as a front tire in fresh snow, they tend to washout, not a bad rear tire though, the Gnarwhal is what you want up front, great tire, even better with studs.









That's a pretty impressive weight... with Nextie 65's and a carbon bar, mine is at 29.12lbs.


----------



## Doug (Jan 12, 2004)

Can I run a 180mm rotor in the rear of a 2017 Farley 7? I will use 27.5” wheels and 4.5” Barb tire in the rear with the dropout full forward. Clearance with the frame is close, maybe 1.5mm when I fitted one on the stand. I saw some scratches as if the previous owner ran a 180 or maybe 183. 

I see posts from some who have done it, but not sure if they kept the dropouts back for more clearance.


----------



## CanuckMountainMan (Oct 29, 2018)

tmbrown said:


> Yep, the Barbs are a pretty well rounded tire, for our local conditions, but as a front tire in fresh snow, they tend to washout, not a bad rear tire though, the Gnarwhal is what you want up front, great tire, even better with studs.
> 
> View attachment 1226243
> 
> ...


X2!

I studded my 27.5x4.5 Gnarwhals...Perfect Winter Combo for ultimate traction on snow/ice.

I have a second set of Gnars' I was planning to use un-studded for Summer...but switching to Barbs now!
Just need to track down some Carbon hoops for a tubeless light-weight fast rolling Summer setup.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Doug said:


> Can I run a 180mm rotor in the rear of a 2017 Farley 7?


Sure. You will need 160 to 180 rear rotor adapter though. I have 180 rear rotor with magura brakes on my 2017 Farley 7.


----------



## Doug (Jan 12, 2004)

RockyJo1 said:


> Any links for a derailleur hanger? 2016 Trek Farely 7.


I've looked all over and can't find anything either. I'm rural so the closest shop that stocks Trek is 45 minutes and it is no guarantee they have them either. They can order, but they are not the best shops, more mass market low end stuff.

And are they really $40? Trek hangers are crazy expensive.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Doug said:


> And are they really $40? Trek hangers are crazy expensive.


As far as I know it's not the hanger only, you get complete Stranglehold dropout for the price. I bought a hanger alone and it was like $20 or so.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

I installed a Crankbrothers 160mm dropper post on my 2017 Farley 9.6.

Just enough room for my shortish legs.

Unfortunately, I broke my SRAM Level TL brake lever in a fall yesterday so I’m looking for a replacement. Either like for like or upgrading to Guides or Shimano XT. Also studded tires


----------



## rushman3 (Jan 24, 2009)

Has anyone heard when the carbon Farley models will be available?


----------



## 2old (Aug 31, 2015)

rushman3 said:


> Has anyone heard when the carbon Farley models will be available?


I seen one at the shop a couple weeks ago. The green one. It is really a sharp color in person.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

The new carbon Farley 2019 frame in rage red color is so sick...


----------



## jvc (Dec 7, 2018)

My new rage red Farley is being built, stopped by shop to look at frame (have only seen it in pics till now) it is sick ...


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

I just bought a 2019 Farley 9.6. I installed a dropper seat post. The black plastic cover that covers the hole where the dropper cable exits the frame by the bottle cage mount, is that supposed to remain open? In my little bag of extras that came with the bike, there was no cover for this area to surround the cable. Its the little black plastic cover that is glued on with shitty glue that doesn't re-stick at all.
Anyone add a internal dropper?


----------



## CanuckMountainMan (Oct 29, 2018)

I put a Bontrager 125mm Line Dropper on my 2018 Farley 7, 
Removed the black plastic tab and never replaced it after installing the cable.

Looks identical to the new 2019 F7's in the LBS 
(that now come stock with the same dropper).


----------



## Freeheeler (Dec 26, 2005)

I put a BikeYoke Revive 160mm dropper in my 2017 9.6, size medium, and used a cork borer to make a clean hole in the plastic plug in the down tube. Cork borers take more time to make holes in rubber or plastic than drill bits, but I find that the results are worth the effort. Here's a pic. (Yes, she needs a wash....)


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

2018 Trek Farley carbon frame set 17.5" - 2.55 kg/5.63 lbs. 2019 Trek Farley carbon frame set 17.5˝ - 2.31 kg / 5.1 lbs. What is the differences in the frames?


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

CanuckMountainMan said:


> I put a Bontrager 125mm Line Dropper on my 2018 Farley 7,
> Removed the black plastic tab and never replaced it after installing the cable.
> 
> Looks identical to the new 2019 F7's in the LBS
> ...


The dropper cable routing is different on the carbon frames, hence why I was referring to the 9.6 and 9.8 frames.


----------



## kgginslc (Jan 20, 2004)

jdaigneault said:


> I just bought a 2019 Farley 9.6. I installed a dropper seat post. The black plastic cover that covers the hole where the dropper cable exits the frame by the bottle cage mount, is that supposed to remain open? In my little bag of extras that came with the bike, there was no cover for this area to surround the cable. Its the little black plastic cover that is glued on with shitty glue that doesn't re-stick at all.
> Anyone add a internal dropper?


Just picked up the same bike and was wondering about cable routing myself. Sounds like you added a post with an external lever? Otherwise, I think that port on the downtube is where the cable enters the frame, not exits.

I'll ask my Trek dealer about a port cover with hole next time I'm there.

For anyone who has installed an internal dropper - did you have to remove the BB to thread the cable?


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

I just had a Crankbrothers 160 mm dropper installed on my Farley 9.6 and the mechanic said he didn't have to pull the crank, he initially thought he would have to.


----------



## CanuckMountainMan (Oct 29, 2018)

..................


----------



## kgginslc (Jan 20, 2004)

CanuckMountainMan said:


> Oh, like this?
> 
> View attachment 1232827


Not sure what you're showing us there - if you have an internal dropper post can you explain or show how cable is routed and what you did with port cover on down tube? maybe I need to look at my bike more closely?


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

kgginslc said:


> Not sure what you're showing us there - if you have an internal dropper post can you explain or show how cable is routed and what you did with port cover on down tube? maybe I need to look at my bike more closely?


Exactly, that picture is showing the rear derailer cable, not the dropper post.


----------



## Freeheeler (Dec 26, 2005)

I routed the cable to a BikeYoke Revive dropper on my 2017 Farley 9.6 as shown in Trek's "MTB Frame Diagram & Technical Information" document for the 2016 Farley:
.








I used Park Tool's IR-1.2 Internal Cable Routing Kit, and didn't need to remove my bottom bracket. Without this tool, installing the internally routed dropper would have been much tougher.
https://www.parktool.com/product/internal-cable-routing-kit-ir-1-2


----------



## adumb (Nov 29, 2009)

RockyJo1 said:


> 2018 Trek Farley carbon frame set 17.5" - 2.55 kg/5.63 lbs. 2019 Trek Farley carbon frame set 17.5˝ - 2.31 kg / 5.1 lbs. What is the differences in the frames?


i am curious about this also. full build for a 2019 9.6 is said to be 28.1. i have a 2017 9.6 setup tubeless and it is 29.1. i would think even if the 2017 was a little heavier after setting it up tubeless it would be lighter than 28.1

adam


----------



## kgginslc (Jan 20, 2004)

adumb said:


> i am curious about this also. full build for a 2019 9.6 is said to be 28.1. i have a 2017 9.6 setup tubeless and it is 29.1. i would think even if the 2017 was a little heavier after setting it up tubeless it would be lighter than 28.1
> 
> adam


Just weighed my stock 2019 9.6, size 19.5, with pedals and bottle cage: weighed 29 1/2 lbs, give or take 1/4 lb. lbs


----------



## adumb (Nov 29, 2009)

kgginslc said:


> Just weighed my stock 2019 9.6, size 19.5, with pedals and bottle cage: weighed 29 1/2 lbs, give or take 1/4 lb. lbs


is that with or without tubes?


----------



## kgginslc (Jan 20, 2004)

adumb said:


> is that with or without tubes?


with tubes


----------



## kgginslc (Jan 20, 2004)

adumb said:


> is that with or without tubes?


Just got rid of the tubes - now 27.5 lbs with 4 oz sealant in each tire.


----------



## adumb (Nov 29, 2009)

thats a number i would be happy with. i got the bike used but it is all stock except for bars and stem. already setup tubeless. i can see being off a little but that seems like alot. i am going to have to check the bike out and see how he did the tubeless conversion, thats the only place i can see the weight hiding.


----------



## adumb (Nov 29, 2009)

kgginslc said:


> Just got rid of the tubes - now 27.5 lbs with 4 oz sealant in each tire.


do you have a bike scale that measures grams? curious what you whole complete front wheel setup weighs. would be super quick to do and would let know if something weird is going on with the wheels. i will try to do mine in the a.m.


----------



## jdaigneault (Oct 18, 2013)

kgginslc said:


> Just got rid of the tubes - now 27.5 lbs with 4 oz sealant in each tire.


What method did you use to go tubeless? I kept the oem rim strips, and used mulefit rim tape. You saved a lot of weight, I may have to weigh mine now and see how much weight I lost.


----------



## kgginslc (Jan 20, 2004)

jdaigneault said:


> What method did you use to go tubeless? I kept the oem rim strips, and used mulefit rim tape. You saved a lot of weight, I may have to weigh mine now and see how much weight I lost.


Took out the original rim strips and replaced with grosgrain ribbon (it needed some pizazz), and then mulefut tape.


----------



## kgginslc (Jan 20, 2004)

adumb said:


> do you have a bike scale that measures grams? curious what you whole complete front wheel setup weighs. would be super quick to do and would let know if something weird is going on with the wheels. i will try to do mine in the a.m.


No, I don't have such a scale. Just a digital bathroom scale with me, or me + bike.


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

kgginslc said:


> Just got rid of the tubes - now 27.5 lbs with 4 oz sealant in each tire.


I went from the Barbegazi and tubes to studded Gnarwhal's tubless and gained a 100g per wheel on the Wampa rims.


----------



## adumb (Nov 29, 2009)

this is the weights i am up with along with a shot of my actual bike. tube is just about a pound. .97 to be exact. i did weigh the flat pedals that are on it now which i won't be using. those weigh 270 a piece. The actual pedals i will be using are just shiman 540's which weigh 180 a piece. that is about a .4 lbs for the pair which is a start. only other item that may be really heavy are the handlebars.

the wheel weight you see is the whole everything except for the axle. which includes whatever the previous owner used to go tubeless.


----------



## farleybob (May 22, 2012)

Does Trek offer a fork with mounting bosses? It looks like the Haru fork does not have any mounting options for anything cages?


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

farleybob said:


> Does Trek offer a fork with mounting bosses? It looks like the Haru fork does not have any mounting options for anything cages?


Unfortunately not for fat. Biggest piss me off about the farley.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## farleybob (May 22, 2012)

solarplex said:


> Unfortunately not for fat. Biggest piss me off about the farley.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's the biggest deal breaker for me. I like the Farley but I need the storage on the fork for winter ultras.


----------



## Doug (Jan 12, 2004)

I am going to a 28t oval OneUp switch and believe the standard with 6mm offset is best. It may not be the prescribed spec, but would bias the chain line toward the inner bigger cogs. I’m in the middle or inner cogs most of the time anyway. 

At 28t chainstay clearance should not be an issue, but maybe tire clearance will? I have a 27.5 4.5 Gnarwal. 

Current crankset is Next Cinch with a 28. I have at least 1/4” clearance to the tire and chainstay, so don’t expect any issues. Am I correct? Anything I’m missing?


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Anyone swap the bluto for a higher travel fork in the 120-140mm range with a larger AC? How did it affect the bike?


----------



## slowgoat (Jan 3, 2014)

Noob Fat Lurker here. 

Is the Farley 5 a good value? Have a local shop that I love and am thinking of pulling the trigger for myself and the wife. 

Thoughts?


----------



## RockyJo1 (Jul 23, 2012)

slowgoat said:


> Noob Fat Lurker here.
> 
> Is the Farley 5 a good value? Have a local shop that I love and am thinking of pulling the trigger for myself and the wife.
> 
> Thoughts?


For the price of two you can get a nice carbon Farley.


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

slowgoat said:


> Noob Fat Lurker here.
> 
> Is the Farley 5 a good value? Have a local shop that I love and am thinking of pulling the trigger for myself and the wife.
> 
> Thoughts?


i think it's the best value going for what you get.


----------



## slowgoat (Jan 3, 2014)

Swerny said:


> i think it's the best value going for what you get.


Thanks! I thought so.

Shimano or Sram for brakes in cold? The million dollar question?


----------



## adumb (Nov 29, 2009)

slowgoat said:


> Noob Fat Lurker here.
> 
> Is the Farley 5 a good value? Have a local shop that I love and am thinking of pulling the trigger for myself and the wife.
> 
> Thoughts?


it really depends on what they are going to sell it to you for. for my money I would look for a used 9.6 and get a carbon frame that would be a great platform to upgrade from. I have seen 2017 and 2016 frames in the 1500-1700 range asking price. might be able to get it a bit cheaper than even that.


----------



## jpaa (Oct 2, 2014)

Farley 9.6 (2018 model). It is extremely cold month here in Finland but I was lucky to be out only -15C degrees...


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

slowgoat said:


> Thanks! I thought so.
> 
> Shimano or Sram for brakes in cold? The million dollar question?


Trp spykes

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jeffw-13 (Apr 30, 2008)

RockyJo1 said:


> 2018 Trek Farley carbon frame set 17.5" - 2.55 kg/5.63 lbs. 2019 Trek Farley carbon frame set 17.5˝ - 2.31 kg / 5.1 lbs. What is the differences in the frames?


About half a pound


----------



## kgginslc (Jan 20, 2004)

I went to the Trek store last week and spoke with the guys there. As far as they know, Trek doesn't make a cover for the hole where the dropper cable enters the frame. We looked at a 9.8 on the floor and there's no cover/grommet at all - the cable just enters the hole in the carbon frame. I guess Trek just expect you to throw the cover away. I didn't. As discussed above, I drilled a hole in the cover for the cable housing. Stuck it back down with double stick tape after running the cable housing through it.

As far as the install, it went far easier than I imagined. I had a cutoff section of cable laying around, I curled the end and pushed it through the hole in the frame and up the seat tube. I was then able to grab the cable with some long forceps and pull it out of the seat tube. Then, I epoxied about 2" of the cable to the side of the cable housing (kept in place with tape while it cured). After about 10' I pulled the cable from the hole in the down tube and the housing came through easily. Cut that 2" off and assemble everything per mfg. instructions. Works great.


----------



## ToiletSiphon (May 25, 2018)

Question for AL frame owners : do you get some rear disc brake rub (very slight) when cranking up the torque? I get some when climbing steep trails in low gear. I guess the frame must be flexing a little. I made sure my thru axle is snug. 

Envoyé de mon SM-A530W en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Saskrider (Jun 30, 2016)

My 7 did, flexed and touched the caliper housing. Quick hit with a file and it quit. You could see the Mark's where it rubbed braking sometimes too


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Negotiator50 said:


> Anyone swap the bluto for a higher travel fork in the 120-140mm range with a larger AC? How did it affect the bike?


I've been considering running a Pike or Fox 34 in the 120-130 range for summer use but haven't pulled the trigger yet.

I'm really having trouble deciding what to do for summer use....run it as 29+ again or just get a separate bike.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

Same here. Same forks. Wish I could get someone's input on whether the increased AC of a 120 degrades the performance of the bike.


----------



## Rideon (Jan 13, 2004)

Negotiator50 said:


> Same here. Same forks. Wish I could get someone's input on whether the increased AC of a 120 degrades the performance of the bike.


I've been running 110 and I really like it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tmbrown (Jun 9, 2007)

Rideon said:


> I've been running 110 and I really like it.


Yep, I had mine up to 130mm, and the front end just flopped around, handling was compromised, 100mm to 110mm is the sweat spot for my local trails. Mastodon 120mm pro standard, on a 9.6 Farley 17.5".


----------



## dirt diggler (Jan 14, 2004)

Hello Farley owners, Can someone verify what spindle width is on a 2016 9.6 with a RF Aeffect. Im guessing 190mm spindle, but my search is saying narrower. Thank you.


----------



## Negotiator50 (Apr 21, 2012)

dirt diggler said:


> Hello Farley owners, Can someone verify what spindle width is on a 2016 9.6 with a RF Aeffect. Im guessing 190mm spindle, but my search is saying narrower. Thank you.


It should be a 190mm spindle but I've been using a 170mm spindle with a flipped chain ring for a few years without any problems.


----------



## dirt diggler (Jan 14, 2004)

Negotiator - Thanks
So a stock/oem was a 190mm spindle ?


----------



## patineto (Oct 28, 2005)

Call me crazy but I want to mount a "Direct front Derailleur to my 9.8"

But those two bolts near the bottom bracket cover by the plastic triangle, make no sense, is it a adapter i need or what...???


----------



## Swerny (Apr 1, 2004)

Negotiator50 said:


> Same here. Same forks. Wish I could get someone's input on whether the increased AC of a 120 degrades the performance of the bike.


i just bought a Fox 34 140 Performance from Pinkbike.

I plan to drop it to 120 mm travel to run it with a 29+ wheelset.

The 120 mm will mean an A2C of about 525.

The Bluto 100 A2C is 511, the Bluto 120 A2C is 531.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

patineto said:


> Call me crazy but I want to mount a "Direct front Derailleur to my 9.8"
> 
> But those two bolts near the bottom bracket cover by the plastic triangle, make no sense, is it a adapter i need or what...???


Yah, most people with a carbon farley should have one. It was in a bag with my reflectors and such on mine.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Saskrider (Jun 30, 2016)

Can anyone confirm if swapping for the circus adjuster allows the mastodon to clear a carbon Farley frame? Heard it once on this thread to clear a different bike and no one has mentioned it since.

What part number do I need for a 2019 to space a steer enough to clear a mastodon?

Thanks


----------



## patineto (Oct 28, 2005)

solarplex said:


> Yah, most people with a carbon farley should have one. It was in a bag with my reflectors and such on mine.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


thanks i got mine used but i can ask the old owner..

thanks..


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

patineto said:


> thanks i got mine used but i can ask the old owner..
> 
> thanks..


https://www.bike24.com/p2181952.html

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ToiletSiphon (May 25, 2018)

Is it just me or does the rear brake always make a lot of noise as soon as the rotor is a little out of true? Like a GBRLGBRLGBRLGBRL sound.

It brakes fine, but I've had it happen on a demo Farley 5 and on my own Farley 5. Never got the same sound with 4 other fat bikes with the same SRAM Level brakes. Something to do with how the brake is mounted? 

Envoyé de mon SM-A530W en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## Gendy (Feb 24, 2018)

I've been doing some research and i'm considering a Farley for a snow bike. Since we are still getting snow in the northeast, and i'm not able to ride, i'm kinda tempted to grab the first one i see. I called a few LBSs and they all said they were sold out, but could try to order one of the limited bikes in stock online. I found one who has a Farley 5 in stock, in XL, which should be my size at 6'2. Do you guys think i should jump on it, or keep my eyes peeled going forward? Based on what the shops said, it doesnt sound like a bike i will find lying around at a LBS, being sold at a blowout price before the new models come? Although a few people in this thread reported having that experience. I definitely wouldnt mind finding a used one to save a few hundred $ either.


----------



## Gendy (Feb 24, 2018)

Gendy said:


> I've been doing some research and i'm considering a Farley for a snow bike. Since we are still getting snow in the northeast, and i'm not able to ride, i'm kinda tempted to grab the first one i see. I called a few LBSs and they all said they were sold out, but could try to order one of the limited bikes in stock online. I found one who has a Farley 5 in stock, in XL, which should be my size at 6'2. Do you guys think i should jump on it, or keep my eyes peeled going forward? Based on what the shops said, it doesnt sound like a bike i will find lying around at a LBS, being sold at a blowout price before the new models come? Although a few people in this thread reported having that experience. I definitely wouldnt mind finding a used one to save a few hundred $ either.


Ah, disregard. The F5 in my size at the LBS was a 2018 model, and they were firm on $1890!  I'll keep my eyes peeled in the classifieds over the summer for something to pop up


----------



## Doug (Jan 12, 2004)

Gendy said:


> I've been doing some research and i'm considering a Farley for a snow bike. Since we are still getting snow in the northeast, and i'm not able to ride, i'm kinda tempted to grab the first one i see. I called a few LBSs and they all said they were sold out, but could try to order one of the limited bikes in stock online. I found one who has a Farley 5 in stock, in XL, which should be my size at 6'2. Do you guys think i should jump on it, or keep my eyes peeled going forward? Based on what the shops said, it doesnt sound like a bike i will find lying around at a LBS, being sold at a blowout price before the new models come? Although a few people in this thread reported having that experience. I definitely wouldnt mind finding a used one to save a few hundred $ either.


My local trek dealer told me Trek reduced production and sold out by December or November in most sizes and models. They may have made more but supply is very limited. Don't expect to find them on blowout.


----------



## Doug (Jan 12, 2004)

Gendy said:


> Ah, disregard. The F5 in my size at the LBS was a 2018 model, and they were firm on $1890!  I'll keep my eyes peeled in the classifieds over the summer for something to pop up


Check Facebook groups. I got mine off a fat bike buy and sell group. Farley's go fast.


----------



## wafflenator (Feb 4, 2014)

Does anyone know the weight of the stock aluminum fork on the 5? I've got a 2017 and I'm considering upgrading to carbon depending on the weight savings. I know I can weight myself but I'd rather not take it apart if someone else already has checked.


----------



## Seventh-777 (Aug 30, 2013)

I'm sure it's been covered but I can't find it in this thread - what's the deal with the Farley EX? I was hoping that they'd release a color other than the blue in the aluminum this/next season but it looks like they don't sell them at all anymore. I'd be in on the carbon frameset but IMO $3500 is too much coin considering that it has an aluminum rear triangle.

Did the full suspension Farleys just not sell? I'd absolutely love one of the black 2017 carbon ones, but I can never seem to find one in a medium.


----------



## Gendy (Feb 24, 2018)

Still no luck finding a used farley. Been waiting for the 2020s to come out, to see if there were any remarkable changes. Looks like Trek just renamed the 2019 models as 2020s. Say what!? Does this happen for time to time, or might it be a mistake?


----------



## Doug (Jan 12, 2004)

Gendy said:


> Still no luck finding a used farley. Been waiting for the 2020s to come out, to see if there were any remarkable changes. Looks like Trek just renamed the 2019 models as 2020s. Say what!? Does this happen for time to time, or might it be a mistake?


I heard they are selling slowly. Not surprised they would carry over 2019 inventory vs make more.

For most brands they just change the colors. Probably have raw frames and paint as needed thennchsmge is the colors and voila...next model year.


----------



## Gendy (Feb 24, 2018)

When i was poking around last year, i was told by more than one LBS the XL's were down to single digit availability. You'd think Trek would at least change the colors if nothing else?


----------



## jtawausau (Aug 19, 2014)

I have a Farley 9.8 ‘19. I am considering a chain guide. Does anyone know whether the MRP S3/e and/or OneUp S3/e would work? I have the S3 adapter mounted to the front mount already.


----------



## El_Topo (Jul 26, 2018)

Does anyone know if the Carbon 9.8 frame in 17.5" can fit a a 2XL on a 100mm rim for sure? 

TIA!


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

El_Topo said:


> Does anyone know if the Carbon 9.8 frame in 17.5" can fit a a 2XL on a 100mm rim for sure?
> 
> TIA!


Not even close.


----------



## El_Topo (Jul 26, 2018)

mikesee said:


> Not even close.


Disappointing but thanks for the info nevertheless.
What is the max tire width in mm that you can fit in a medium Farley then? 2XL on 100mm rim is approx 132mm from what I was able to gather.
Would it work with a 90mm rim? Or is something even narrower needed?

*Have there been any changes to the carbon frame since 2016*? I am looking at a used *2016* 9.8 in 17.5" and am wondering if there are any downsides to the actual frame.
Also, do all Wampa wheels have the "Rapid Drive" hubs that can be upgraded to 108 teeth, or would I need a newer Wampa wheelset than 2016? This info can't be found in Trek's archive.


----------



## Gendy (Feb 24, 2018)

Just picked up a 9.6 (slightly used) for snow riding in the northeast. Couldnt help but start using it for trail riding for the last month due to excitement. Its mostly stock except for an upgraded saddle and 35mm renthal carbon bars. My only gripe with trail riding is how HARSH the ride is, most notable when hopping off/over small trees and stuff. I'm not sure if its because i haven't been on a rigid since i was a child, or i cant help by wonder if the bars could be amplifying this? I had some 35mm line pros on my superfly a while back and felt the same thing, i'm tempted to blame the 35mm carbon bars (again) and possibly get some aluminum ones or 31.8 carbons. Can anybody shed light on this?


----------



## shoo (Nov 11, 2008)

Could be the handlebars. 
What wheel and tire combo are you running? What tire pressure? Are you running tubeless?



Gendy said:


> Just picked up a 9.6 (slightly used) for snow riding in the northeast. Couldnt help but start using it for trail riding for the last month due to excitement. Its mostly stock except for an upgraded saddle and 35mm renthal carbon bars. My only gripe with trail riding is how HARSH the ride is, most notable when hopping off/over small trees and stuff. I'm not sure if its because i haven't been on a rigid since i was a child, or i cant help by wonder if the bars could be amplifying this? I had some 35mm line pros on my superfly a while back and felt the same thing, i'm tempted to blame the 35mm carbon bars (again) and possibly get some aluminum ones or 31.8 carbons. Can anybody shed light on this?


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Gendy said:


> Just picked up a 9.6 (slightly used) for snow riding in the northeast. Couldnt help but start using it for trail riding for the last month due to excitement. Its mostly stock except for an upgraded saddle and 35mm renthal carbon bars. My only gripe with trail riding is how HARSH the ride is, most notable when hopping off/over small trees and stuff. I'm not sure if its because i haven't been on a rigid since i was a child, or i cant help by wonder if the bars could be amplifying this? I had some 35mm line pros on my superfly a while back and felt the same thing, i'm tempted to blame the 35mm carbon bars (again) and possibly get some aluminum ones or 31.8 carbons. Can anybody shed light on this?


I have 31.8 RF next bars and my 9.6 is fine. 7/8 psi on dirt with esi chunkies. Not really rough at all.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Gendy (Feb 24, 2018)

shoo said:


> Could be the handlebars.
> What wheel and tire combo are you running? What tire pressure? Are you running tubeless?


Still running stock Barbs for now while i research tires. Havent pulled the tubes yet, so i've been running 8-9 psi where i ride which can be a little rooty or rocky


----------



## shoo (Nov 11, 2008)

Gendy said:


> Still running stock Barbs for now while i research tires. Havent pulled the tubes yet, so i've been running 8-9 psi where i ride which can be a little rooty or rocky


I believe that is a little high on the pressure even with tubes. I live in the mid Atlantic and it is rooty & rocky here. The big tires are very sensitive to pressure change, 2/10ths of a psi can make a big difference.


----------



## Way2ManyBikes (Aug 24, 2011)

Gendy said:


> Just picked up a 9.6 (slightly used) for snow riding in the northeast. Couldnt help but start using it for trail riding for the last month due to excitement. Its mostly stock except for an upgraded saddle and 35mm renthal carbon bars. My only gripe with trail riding is how HARSH the ride is, most notable when hopping off/over small trees and stuff. I'm not sure if its because i haven't been on a rigid since i was a child, or i cant help by wonder if the bars could be amplifying this? I had some 35mm line pros on my superfly a while back and felt the same thing, i'm tempted to blame the 35mm carbon bars (again) and possibly get some aluminum ones or 31.8 carbons. Can anybody shed light on this?


I know this set up is stupid expensive but FSA carbon riser bar & seat post hands down is the most comfortable setup that I own. T

I have four Farleys and the harshest riding bar I own is the Bontrager bar and that bike has a Bluto on it. The Race Face bars are also a great choice but the FSA with a rigid carbon fork is still better.

https://shop.fullspeedahead.com/en/type/k-force-mtb-full-carbon-riser-handlebar

https://shop.fullspeedahead.com/en/type/seatpost/k-force-seatpost-sb25-3566


----------



## thisisbenji (Nov 13, 2010)

Gendy said:


> Just picked up a 9.6 (slightly used) for snow riding in the northeast. Couldnt help but start using it for trail riding for the last month due to excitement. Its mostly stock except for an upgraded saddle and 35mm renthal carbon bars. My only gripe with trail riding is how HARSH the ride is, most notable when hopping off/over small trees and stuff. I'm not sure if its because i haven't been on a rigid since i was a child, or i cant help by wonder if the bars could be amplifying this? I had some 35mm line pros on my superfly a while back and felt the same thing, i'm tempted to blame the 35mm carbon bars (again) and possibly get some aluminum ones or 31.8 carbons. Can anybody shed light on this?


What kind of tire pressures are you running? I can't imagine any sort of "harshness" would transfer through on these after you account for all of the tire we're running.


----------



## Gendy (Feb 24, 2018)

shoo said:


> Could be the handlebars.
> What wheel and tire combo are you running? What tire pressure? Are you running tubeless?





shoo said:


> I believe that is a little high on the pressure even with tubes. I live in the mid Atlantic and it is rooty & rocky here. The big tires are very sensitive to pressure change, 2/10ths of a psi can make a big difference.





thisisbenji said:


> What kind of tire pressures are you running? I can't imagine any sort of "harshness" would transfer through on these after you account for all of the tire we're running.


Running the stock wheels and barbs. I had the tires up around 8f/9r initially. I rode some super knarly rocky/rooty trails last night, and i had the tires down to ~7f/8r by the time i left. that did seem to help a bit. hope to sort out what i need for tubeless soon and be able to go a little lower.


----------



## bapski (Jul 27, 2012)

... please delete


----------



## bapski (Jul 27, 2012)

fat_biike_boy said:


> Hi-
> I made hubs for my Farley 5 front wheel to adapt from 135mm to 150mm which allowed me to get the Rock Shox Bluto working with original wheel/hub. Due to the cost pricing of the tooling I made extras. If you need a set to adapt your wheel set let me know and I can help out a fellow fat biker.
> 
> View attachment 1179247
> View attachment 1179248


i just found this post and this may be the solution to my issues with my 2014 Farley and an on On One Fatty carbon fork.

any chance of getting this adapters.

thank you in advance.


----------



## fewg8 (Oct 25, 2013)

I bought 2 or three sets from him at that time. All are still in service and running strong!


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Fall mode










Winter mode

Bumped my drive to 32t ring with a 10-46 sunrace cassette.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Saskrider said:


> Can anyone confirm if swapping for the circus adjuster allows the mastodon to clear a carbon Farley frame? Heard it once on this thread to clear a different bike and no one has mentioned it since.
> 
> What part number do I need for a 2019 to space a steer enough to clear a mastodon?
> 
> Thanks


Can't answer that specific question, but I got a taller crown race to install on my Mastodon, which both gives me a slightly taller BB height and allows the Mastodon to clear the downtube.


----------



## El_Topo (Jul 26, 2018)

Will a wide studded 27.5" tire the Terrene Cake Eater 4.5" on a 95mm rim fit into a 17.5" Carbon Farley, or just the aluminium ones that seems to be able to accommodate a bit wider tires?
The CE is a true 4.5" on a 80mm rim, so it should be close to 120mm on said rim if my calculations are correct.

Thanks for looking into this.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

For medium 9.x owners.

Can anyone please confirm large 27.5 studded tire fit within your medium frame? News of mediums coming with the smaller Gnarwhal is a concern. 

The studded 27.5 x 4.5 Gnarwhal or Dillinger 5 27.5 are examples of what I'n looking for. The goal in addition to studded tires is more float than a 27.5 x 3.8 Hodag.

I'm not sure if the fit issue is rub on seat tube, chain or seat stays. I'm sure I could live with the smaller studded Gnarwhal in back but all I see is it is the same casing I have now. I really want a larger rear tire with studs in addition to a big one in front.

Thank you.


----------



## tmbrown (Jun 9, 2007)

Yeah, no problem with 4.5's with studs on this med frame 9.6.


----------



## rushman3 (Jan 24, 2009)

tmbrown

Nice Farley 7, what carbon wheelset did you upgrade to?


----------



## tmbrown (Jun 9, 2007)

rushman3 said:


> tmbrown
> 
> Nice Farley 7, what carbon wheelset did you upgrade to?


Thanks... that's a 9.6 medium with Nextie 65's.


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

El_Topo said:


> Disappointing but thanks for the info nevertheless.
> What is the max tire width in mm that you can fit in a medium Farley then? 2XL on 100mm rim is approx 132mm from what I was able to gather.
> Would it work with a 90mm rim? Or is something even narrower needed?
> 
> ...


Frame is the same. 2019 wampas (black Wampa stickers) have the 108. All of the other wampa hubs can't be upgraded to anything else, stuck with the 3 pawl crappy engagement.


----------



## El_Topo (Jul 26, 2018)

twentyniner29 said:


> Frame is the same. 2019 wampas (black Wampa stickers) have the 108. All of the other wampa hubs can't be upgraded to anything else, stuck with the 3 pawl crappy engagement.


Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it as I was already settled on getting a set of used Wampas when the occasion arises.
Can you provide me with a link about the difference between Trek's hubs? I googled for "3 pawl hub bontrager" but didn't find anything useful.
If the old Trek hubs are that bad, I might just go for a Chinese carbon rim with DT Swiss hubs or any other ones of my choice.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

What are your favored frame bags? Especially if you have a medium and they don't break the bank? I hesitate to spend much because I never use the Farley loaded up the way I do my tour/gravel bike. This idea is mostly thinking I don't want to buy a winter kit for my new Osprey pack.

I think our med Farley has space much like our med. Fargo. I might spend more knowing it would be fine for both bikes.

Thank you.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

bitflogger said:


> What are your favored frame bags? Especially if you have a medium and they don't break the bank? I hesitate to spend much because I never use the Farley loaded up the way I do my tour/gravel bike. This idea is mostly thinking I don't want to buy a winter kit for my new Osprey pack.
> 
> I think our med Farley has space much like our med. Fargo. I might spend more knowing it would be fine for both bikes.
> 
> Thank you.


https://www.teknikul.com/index.html

This guy made a few for guys on the trek farley fan page.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## twentyniner29 (Dec 2, 2014)

El_Topo said:


> Thanks for the reply, I appreciate it as I was already settled on getting a set of used Wampas when the occasion arises.
> Can you provide me with a link about the difference between Trek's hubs? I googled for "3 pawl hub bontrager" but didn't find anything useful.
> If the old Trek hubs are that bad, I might just go for a Chinese carbon rim with DT Swiss hubs or any other ones of my choice.


The hubs aren't bad, but the engagement is not great! There really isn't any info on the old ones, but if you look up Bontrager rapid drive 108 you can get info on the new ones.


----------



## TT. (Feb 2, 2004)

After trying to ride 27.5x4 on ungroomed terrain last year, I decided to dial the Farley in for our backcountry bush trails. So far I'm very happy with this combo, 26x100 cf rims with 2xls f/r. The rear needed a slight knob shave, but they are on there and taking me places no bike should go:thumbsup:

Got float?


----------



## El_Topo (Jul 26, 2018)

TT. said:


> After trying to ride 27.5x4 on ungroomed terrain last year, I decided to dial the Farley in for our backcountry bush trails. So far I'm very happy with this combo, 26x100 cf rims with 2xls f/r. The rear needed a slight knob shave, but they are on there and taking me places no bike should go:thumbsup:


This looks like a recent 9.8 "Rage Red" carbon frame which shouldn't take a 2XL on a 100mm rim according to various reports here.
Can you give us details about the frame, please?


----------



## TT. (Feb 2, 2004)

El_Topo said:


> This looks like a recent 9.8 "Rage Red" carbon frame which shouldn't take a 2XL on a 100mm rim according to various reports here.
> Can you give us details about the frame, please?


yes, it's a 2019 medium model. the rear tire doesn't fit straight out of the box. Some knobs need a 2mm trim to clear the seat stays. Tires are exactly what I was looking for for the type of trails I often ride. ymmv


----------



## adumb (Nov 29, 2009)

i have a 2017 farley 9.6 with the race face aeffect cinch crank set. The bike comes with a 28t chain ring and i would like to go to a 26 or 24. Has anybody run a 24t yet? 

when I am looking at what offset to get i see offsets for boost and non boost but i don't see a fat bike offset for chain rings. Does anyone know which offset came stock on the bike? I don't see any offset marking on my current chain ring.

thanks,
adam


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Yep, I've run 26t and 24t on my Farley.

You're not going to have many choices for offset in that size. Possibly only one -- the RaceFace 24t ring.

Run it. It works fine.


----------



## adumb (Nov 29, 2009)

mikesee said:


> Yep, I've run 26t and 24t on my Farley.
> 
> You're not going to have many choices for offset in that size. Possibly only one -- the RaceFace 24t ring.
> 
> Run it. It works fine.


thanks for the info i am going to go shopping for one now.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

adumb said:


> thanks for the info i am going to go shopping for one now.


Its a non boost ring ran inside out.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## adumb (Nov 29, 2009)

solarplex said:


> Its a non boost ring ran inside out.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


thats weird this chart looks like its saying it should be +2mm.

https://www.jensonusa.com/Race-Face-Cinch-Direct-Mount-Chainring

Your probably right these companies just make ordering what should be a simple part a pain in the butt. They don't even have the offset listed anywhere on the page either.


----------



## GnarBrahWyo (Jun 4, 2012)

Who is utilizing the "Stranglehold" sliding dropout?

I am assuming all the way to the back is good for descending (more stability at speed) and all the way forward is better for climbing at the expense of downhill stability. 

Just curious if anyone has tinkered with them at all.


----------



## bitflogger (Jan 12, 2004)

GnarBrahWyo said:


> Who is utilizing the "Stranglehold" sliding dropout?
> 
> I am assuming all the way to the back is good for descending (more stability at speed) and all the way forward is better for climbing at the expense of downhill stability.
> 
> Just curious if anyone has tinkered with them at all.


I use them to fit the big studded tire in medium-sized frame. Otherwise I want chain stays as short as possible.

For me longer is better for steep climbing and shorter better for anything else.


----------



## GnarBrahWyo (Jun 4, 2012)

bitflogger said:


> I use them to fit the big studded tire in medium-sized frame. Otherwise I want chain stays as short as possible.
> 
> For me longer is better for steep climbing and shorter better for anything else.


I just moved mine up probably 75% of the way forward. Actually that makes a pretty significant difference as far as feel goes. Seems like I now have a bit more weight on my front wheel which is good for the snowy trails I ride that have a lot of elevation change. Real test is when I hit the trails this week.


----------



## tvan (Nov 27, 2007)

Are original Jackalope wheels any good? I just bought a barely used 2016 9.6 for a great price. Was thinking with the money I saved I might build a wheelset but I do really like the design of the Jackalope rim. Tubless setup was amazingly easy and the tires fit nice and tight. My concern is how will they hold up riding rocky trails. They seem pretty thin. I’m running 4.5 Barbegazzi tires so that should help protect them a bit. 
They are in perfect condition now so if I should sell them, this would be the time before I ding them up
Also, want to change to AB oval chainring. Am I correct thinking I need the non boost 6mm offset flipped? Seems like they come marked with two dots fir easy alignment for this setup.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

tvan said:


> Are original Jackalope wheels any good? I just bought a barely used 2016 9.6 for a great price. Was thinking with the money I saved I might build a wheelset but I do really like the design of the Jackalope rim. Tubless setup was amazingly easy and the tires fit nice and tight. My concern is how will they hold up riding rocky trails. They seem pretty thin. I'm running 4.5 Barbegazzi tires so that should help protect them a bit.
> They are in perfect condition now so if I should sell them, this would be the time before I ding them up


Depends on how/where you're going to use them, and how pernickety you are with keeping tabs on pressures.

I can ride Jackalopes all summer on rough desert trails, up and down washes, even off piste in the alpine or in dry river beds with cobbles, and never have issues with hitting rim to rock.

Then I have customers that ride the same rims and kill them (with dents) within a few weeks.


----------



## tvan (Nov 27, 2007)

Thanks Mikesee, I check my pressure every ride and I typically don’t have problem with any other rims, well aside from the Arc 40 that was on the rear of my Chromag but I’ll blame that on the fact it had a 160mm fork which made me ride it like a full suspension. Lol
Rigid forks def make you more alert. I really like the Jackalope rims so I’ll give them a shot. Why did they stop making them? Would be nice to know I could get a replacement if things go south.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

tvan said:


> I really like the Jackalope rims so I'll give them a shot. Why did they stop making them? Would be nice to know I could get a replacement if things go south.


They still make them in 26", but not 27.5". I haven't gotten a clear answer on why.


----------



## upclever (Sep 17, 2019)

Has anyone replaced their Farley carbon frame with Trek Carbon Care? if so was it a deal? How much?
Did you decide to purchase a frame from another Company for a better price?


----------



## bikeny (Feb 26, 2004)

What's the scoop on the Jackalope hubs? I'm thinking about picking up a used set Bfat wheels from a 2016 9.6, Jackalope rims and hubs. I'm generally easy on gear and it would be only for snow riding. I'm familiar with and really like the Jackalope rims, but have no experience with the stock hubs. Also, is a Shimano HG freehub readily available to replace the XD driver? What do yall think is a fair price for a set is very good condition? Thanks!


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

bikeny said:


> What's the scoop on the Jackalope hubs? I'm thinking about picking up a used set Bfat wheels from a 2016 9.6, Jackalope rims and hubs. I'm generally easy on gear and it would be only for snow riding. I'm familiar with and really like the Jackalope rims, but have no experience with the stock hubs. Also, is a Shimano HG freehub readily available to replace the XD driver? What do yall think is a fair price for a set is very good condition? Thanks!


Front hub is fine, just like any front hub.

Haven't seen many failures with the rear hub, likely because most of the locals riding them barely ride these bikes.

I've got a Shimano freehub for ya. Yours for the cost of shipping. Ping me.


----------



## bikeny (Feb 26, 2004)

mikesee said:


> Front hub is fine, just like any front hub.
> 
> Haven't seen many failures with the rear hub, likely because most of the locals riding them barely ride these bikes.
> 
> I've got a Shimano freehub for ya. Yours for the cost of shipping. Ping me.


Thanks for the quick reply Mike. I figured the front was fine, so was more asking about the rear. I'd obviously rather have a DT350 on the rear, but if the price is right I might pick them up and see how it goes. Thanks for generous freehub offer, if I end up buying them I'll ping you.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Got a new take off colossus from a yukon. Faster than a gnarwhal but grippier than a barb.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Had some plus temps and shes glazed and icy, gnars back on.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TT. (Feb 2, 2004)

making some fresh tracks off the beaten path:thumbsup:


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

TT. said:


> making some fresh tracks off the beaten path:thumbsup:
> View attachment 1309429


Wild, i didnt think those fit the carbon frame in the back.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TT. (Feb 2, 2004)

haha, you know the old sayin' "where there is a will, there is a way"


----------



## cr3anmachin3 (Feb 24, 2015)

hi all. Does anyone know the precise brake adapter type to allow the 2016 Farley 5 to take a 180mm rotor? I fitted what I believe is the correct type but I think I still have some rotor rub at the extreme edge of the rotor in the caliper. When I look at the wheel mounted straight on it does not look exactly straight...wondering if the QR lever could be bent a little causing the wheel not to sit flush in dropouts.


----------



## erik$ (May 16, 2006)

My wife got herself a Farley C frameset but there was no seatpost clamp included. As far as I could find the aluminum framesets take a 36.4 mm but I struggle with finding any info on the C frames. My calipers tell me it is close to 37.0, but I would be happy if someone could confirm.

Cheers


----------



## PoshJosh (Mar 30, 2007)

36.4 is correct.


----------



## erik$ (May 16, 2006)

Thanks!


----------



## JustRon (Nov 20, 2009)

Sorry if this been answered, but I just got a 2018 Farley 7 and the Mastodon doesn't clear the downtube. I don't like the glued-on pad, and instead of adding a thicker crown race, has anyone found a thinner/low-profile knob that fits? (I don't want to grind it down.)
I searched the Mastodon thread but couldn't find an answer.


----------



## ToiletSiphon (May 25, 2018)

Hey I'm desperately looking to reduce crank arm length on my Farley 5, which comes stock with a raceface ride crank mounted on a 167. 25 mm spindle (24mm diameter). Thing is, I can't find any aftermarket Raceface cranks with this spindle length in 24mm width. 

What are my options?


----------



## wookieone (Mar 21, 2006)

What do folks do for a field replaceable derailleur hanger? I was carrying the hanger only to realize I needed a socket to actually use/replace. I really don't want to carry a socket, wrench or adjustable to replace a hanger in the backcountry. Anyone have a better solution for this bike?


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

wookieone said:


> What do folks do for a field replaceable derailleur hanger? I was carrying the hanger only to realize I needed a socket to actually use/replace. I really don't want to carry a socket, wrench or adjustable to replace a hanger in the backcountry. Anyone have a better solution for this bike?


Better off to carry a spare derailleur on a trek. The hangers are so damn stiff

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mudflap (Feb 23, 2004)

Thanks to Trek and Farley9.6 I'm one of you guys now. Bad a$$!


----------



## TT. (Feb 2, 2004)

congrats mudflap thumbsup:
Working the farley hard this weekend. -27 celcius, pulling a 60lb load to set up basecamp, and ripping the snowshoe trails in spare time, this thing just keeps delivering the goods


----------



## mudflap (Feb 23, 2004)

Thanks TT. Minus 27C is cold. What do you do in case of flatting or shredding a tire when out on the trail? Can you walk out?
I doubt I will ever ride my fatty in those conditions. Hell, I just gave up bc skiing in those conditions for riding in less severe conditions, like minimal snow, a little mud here and there, and a lot of sunshine.


----------



## TT. (Feb 2, 2004)

c'mon..I'm sure those mountains will be calling you back mudflap!!
I love getting out there in minus stupid temps, chasing the powder as long into the season as possible  
As for the "what ifs"...I travel light so I'm always up for a bike'ahike...lol


----------



## mudflap (Feb 23, 2004)

dude, I love the mountains, love the pow, and even love the cold, but time is catching up with me.
Good thing I can still crank on my mtn bike - it gets me out there.


----------



## Jeff_G (Oct 22, 2015)

*Front Hub Bearings*

I was changing out my studded tires and heard a growl in my bearing.

Pulled the caps and the bearings were dry. Cleaned and regreased them without pulling the bearings. I can still feel a little friction.

How do you get that tube out to replace the bearings? Gave it a tap with a rubber mallet but wanted to ride so I left well enough alone.

I searched a for a half hour and couldn't find anything similar to it on the interwebs.

Thanks. Oh, and if you had the bearing number thatt would be super as well.


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

ChargeCookerMaxi said:


> So I'm going to buy some of the 9.6 wheels for my Surly ICT. I need to switch the XD freehub driver for a Shimano driver. Does anyone know where I can find the correct driver for the Jackalope hub?


Resurrecting an oldie, I know, but I'm wondering whether you ever figured out which Shimano driver to swap out for your XD. I'm looking at doing the same with a Jackalope rear hub I'm building up. Is it the Bontrager Rhythm Comp/Elite 10-Speed Freehub Body?


----------



## Tren'z (Dec 31, 2020)

Hi! I owned a 2017 9.6 with a stock Aeffect Crank. Just wondering what size or spindle length it is, I'm planning to change it with Sram Gx. Im not sure what to buy a Fat 4 or Fat 5.


----------



## TCsomeday (Apr 17, 2021)

ToiletSiphon said:


> Hey I'm desperately looking to reduce crank arm length on my Farley 5, which comes stock with a raceface ride crank mounted on a 167. 25 mm spindle (24mm diameter). Thing is, I can't find any aftermarket Raceface cranks with this spindle length in 24mm width.
> 
> What are my options?


Did you ever get an answer? I am in the same boat. Bought a slightly used Farely 5 and lkve the bike but the 175mm cranks ae just to long for my frame.


----------



## ToiletSiphon (May 25, 2018)

TCsomeday said:


> Did you ever get an answer? I am in the same boat. Bought a slightly used Farely 5 and lkve the bike but the 175mm cranks ae just to long for my frame.


I found a Raceface Aeffect 170mm on Ebay and mounted an Absolute Black oval chainring on it. Knee problems solved!

Unfortunately, it was discontinued 2 years ago in that spindle width and can't find another one anymore (I thought of getting a spare). The Raceface Ride is produced in 170mm, since smaller Farley come with it, but I don't know if it's OEM only or not. And I think it's not cinch, so limited chainring options.

Envoyé de mon SM-G973W en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## TCsomeday (Apr 17, 2021)

If anyone can point me in a different direction it would be appreciated. Im coming up on 60 years old, and ride everyday. Switched from a Specialized roll (comfort bike) to this Farley. Love it. little shorter stem, slightly raised handlebars with 16deg back sweep and new ergo grips. So far I love it and want to keep riding. Problem is I have some what shorter legs and really need a 165 crank arm from all research. Im not out of the saddle all the time so seated really brings the knees up. Road hard yesterday and knees are a little sore. This doesn't happen on the Roll and can only contribute it to the longer cranks on farley. Race face told my I can NOT buy just the cranks with out the spindle as unlike others, it is pressed on and can not be taken off and used on different cranks. 

What are my options to get to a 165 crank with the proper spindle length ? Thanks


----------



## ToiletSiphon (May 25, 2018)

I was really intent on getting a 165mm crank too, but options are almost non existent for that spindle length. Seriously, you should consider 170 + oval ring - the shape of the oval really eases up the pressure on knees at the top of the pedal stroke.

You can get a Raceface Ride crank. Other possibilities, which will all require a new BB since they have a different diameter : Raceface Atlas, Sram x4 and Sram x5. Gathered this just by looking at Trek website and what cranks they specced on all their Farley lineup. 

Envoyé de mon SM-G973W en utilisant Tapatalk


----------



## TCsomeday (Apr 17, 2021)

ToiletSiphon said:


> I was really intent on getting a 165mm crank too, but options are almost non existent for that spindle length. Seriously, you should consider 170 + oval ring - the shape of the oval really eases up the pressure on knees at the top of the pedal stroke.
> 
> You can get a Raceface Ride crank. Other possibilities, which will all require a new BB since they have a different diameter : Raceface Atlas, Sram x4 and Sram x5. Gathered this just by looking at Trek website and what cranks they specced on all their Farley lineup.
> 
> Envoyé de mon SM-G973W en utilisant Tapatalk


Thank you


----------



## El_Topo (Jul 26, 2018)

Does anyone know if the 15.5" (Carbon) Farley can run the same sized rear tires as the larger frames?


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

any word on a new frame? fatbikes kind of are dying but also sold out constantly so? i would love the sliding axel gone to a flip chip, longer reach, geometry closer to the new fezzari. the blizzard is nice but a bit tooo slack im thinking for my riding... fezzari has a weird name.


----------



## andyflaw (Jun 20, 2011)

Keep the sliding dropout for SS I say. A degree or so slacker HA and a bit more reach but not a ton. I doubt we will see changes, just new colours and a price rise.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

andyflaw said:


> Keep the sliding dropout for SS I say. A degree or so slacker HA and a bit more reach but not a ton. I doubt we will see changes, just new colours and a price rise.


 Its not a great design, the little nylocs pop out and the paint chips around the slot, and i find it needs more maintenance than it should even when you dont use it. just use a half link or a tensioner is you go SS. its just hard on the knees anyways.


----------



## OttaCee (Jul 24, 2013)

Speaking of the sliding dropout, anyone having issues with the Stranglehold Nut for the rear axle failing? I seem to break one or both of the nuts every year. Yes torqued correctly with wrench. 
No clue why Trek uses aluminum and not steel for this nut.


----------



## El_Topo (Jul 26, 2018)

Would someone be so kind to tell me which crown race I need for my 2020 Farley 5 with a Mastodon?
Cane Creek offers ones with a seal, are those to be preferred?
I figure I need a IS52/40, but am unsure to order the wrong one.

TIA!


----------



## Tyr-Sog (Jan 17, 2018)

El_Topo said:


> Does anyone know if the 15.5" (Carbon) Farley can run the same sized rear tires as the larger frames?


My medium carbon 22' came stock what the large comes stock with. If I remember correctly it was confusing on Treks website implying that the smalls and mediums come with a smaller back tire. Maybe that was for the Aluminum version, I can't remember lol.

Anyways, not sure if that helps you.


----------



## Pinned (Jan 12, 2019)

What's stem lengths are people typically riding on their 2016 Farleys, is the standard length ok or is it a little twitchy?


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Pinned said:


> What's stem lengths are people typically riding on their 2016 Farleys, is the standard length ok or is it a little twitchy?


Stock for me. Bike has super short reach. Need that 90mm stem.


----------



## HUKIT (Apr 17, 2007)

El_Topo said:


> Does anyone know if the 15.5" (Carbon) Farley can run the same sized rear tires as the larger frames?


I’ve got a 2017 9.8 in small and have no trouble with 4.5” Gnarwhals, Barbagazi’s, and Maxxis Colossus with the dropouts fully extended.


----------



## Pinned (Jan 12, 2019)

HUKIT said:


> I’ve got a 2017 9.8 in small and have no trouble with 4.5” Gnarwhals, Barbagazi’s, and Maxxis Colossus with the dropouts fully extended.


Thanks, but the question wasn't about clearance rather running mismatched tyre sizes on a fat bike.


----------



## HUKIT (Apr 17, 2007)

Pinned said:


> Thanks, but the question wasn't about clearance rather running mismatched tyre sizes on a fat bike.


Probably the reason I didn’t quote your post then huh…


----------



## Pinned (Jan 12, 2019)

HUKIT said:


> Probably the reason I didn’t quote your post then huh…


My bad, reading on a phone. Apologies.


----------



## Bills (Jun 13, 2009)

Would it be worth the upgrade to go from a 2018 Farley 7 to a new Farley 9.6? The new one has me thinking about it, but not sure today.


----------

