# The Minnesota 1.0 and 2.0 Fatbikes



## MplsFunk (Jan 14, 2013)

:eekster: I know this is already posted but didn't earlier. Sorry for the duplicate thread.

Another entry into the sub-$1000 fatbike market is the "Minnesota":

$799 Aluminum Fat Bike | Gear Review | Gear Junkie

Bikes - Framed Bikes

It's 23F here in (the state of) Minnesota. The snow from earlier this week has melted but I'm commuting on the Pug this morning. Huzzah!


----------



## jonshonda (Apr 21, 2011)

I think this thread was 7 down from yours.

http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/another-low-priced-fat-bike-option-886474.html :thumbsup:


----------



## MplsFunk (Jan 14, 2013)

Eff me. 

Tips on deleting a thread?


----------



## jonshonda (Apr 21, 2011)

MplsFunk said:


> Eff me.
> 
> Tips on deleting a thread?


Sorry no....but I can give you tips on creating threads that wouldn't need to be deleted.:thumbsup:



MiniTrail said:


> Bet ya a buck someone else posts it at least one more time


I take paypal.


----------



## MauricioB (Oct 16, 2007)

jonshonda said:


> I think this thread was 7 down from yours.
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/another-low-priced-fat-bike-option-886474.html :thumbsup:


Sure would have been nice had the original thread been titled something useful, like "The Minnesota 1.0 and 2.0 Fatbikes." Would really reduce the likelihood of dupe threads popping up. Just sayin'.


----------



## Timpanogos (Jun 26, 2009)

Keep this thread! The title is way better. Let the other one die. Here's stuff from the other thread:

*Slow Danger*: "The website shows a 1.0 and a 2.0 version. Anybody find any differences other than colored rims?"

*nikj*: "9 and 18 speed"

*Timpanogos*: "The tires are also different. One has 72 tpi wire and the other has 120 tpi folding."

*Pancake*: "Ehhhhhhhhhhhh:

"Limited Warranty

(a) This warranty extends only to the original retail purchaser of the bicycle.

(b) This warranty covers for one year defects in material and workmanship only in the alloy steel or Cro-Moly frames and forks of the bicycle.

(c) This warranty does not cover paint, decals, tires, tubes, chains, rims, cables, pads, handlebars, grips, pedals, and other wear items."

*puchcobra*: "I just received a response via Ebay and she said it will be be available in early February.

Morning,

Thanks so much for the email! I just spoke with the bossman and it appears that the Fat Bikes should be available on eBay early February so keep in touch with us towards the end of January and we'll go from there. Take care!

Leslie?"

Now you are up to date.


----------



## puchcobra (Nov 6, 2013)

I just recieved another email:
Thanks for the email! The bikes will be in stock end of January to early February. The-House.com will be running an extra wheel set promo and should start taking pre-orders today or tomorrow. Please let me know if you have any other questions.
-Davin


----------



## Jisch (Jan 12, 2004)

The rims look strange on that bike - either made of a thick material or double walled with the space filled in?


----------



## SocratesDiedTrolling (Sep 15, 2012)

Yeah, I wish I could get a closer look at the rim. On the spec list, it says they are single walled, 80mm rims from Weinmann, but the holes look just as deep as on the double walled, 80mm Weinmann rear rim on the Motobecane fatty.


----------



## bhc (Sep 27, 2005)

Did anyone see sizes available?


----------



## Volsung (Nov 24, 2011)

minnesota the state is awesome. minnesota the bike is meh.


----------



## The Kopish (Jul 12, 2009)

No worries. The whole point was to discuss the bikes. Let me thread run it's course or I can delete it.


----------



## Slow Danger (Oct 9, 2009)

In the other thread, somebody had the impression that the bike comes with 29 inch wheels as well as fat. Can anyone confirm whether both wheel sets come with the bike? I might have missed on the website, but didn't see anything.


----------



## richie64 (May 24, 2013)

I emailed them about sizes because I am looking for a XS for my wife she is 5' 1" and not sure wants a fat bike but for this price it seems like a good deal. Anyways on the sizes they are not making a XS on their first run of bikes. Thinking it might be a risky move and maybe not sell. 

Rich


----------



## bhc (Sep 27, 2005)

Slow Danger said:


> In the other thread, somebody had the impression that the bike comes with 29 inch wheels as well as fat. Can anyone confirm whether both wheel sets come with the bike? I might have missed on the website, but didn't see anything.


The second wheel set will be part of a pre-order promotional. I read that somewhere on one of the websites that were linked to. It also said check back in a few days for the opportunity to order.


----------



## bhc (Sep 27, 2005)

richie64 said:


> I emailed them about sizes because I am looking for a XS for my wife she is 5' 1" and not sure wants a fat bike but for this price it seems like a good deal. Anyways on the sizes they are not making a XS on their first run of bikes. Thinking it might be a risky move and maybe not sell.
> 
> Rich


Did they tell you what sizes they are producing?


----------



## richie64 (May 24, 2013)

bhc said:


> Did they tell you what sizes they are producing?


No they did not, but then I didn't ask them. I am only looking for an XS for my wife. They did respond quickly to my e-mail so you may want to send them one too.


----------



## Greenfin (Jun 13, 2011)

MplsFunk said:


> :eekster: I know this is already posted but didn't earlier. Sorry for the duplicate thread.
> 
> Another entry into the sub-$1000 fatbike market is the "Minnesota":
> 
> ...


I did not see the other thread thanks for making this on.


----------



## Timpanogos (Jun 26, 2009)

MiniTrail said:


> yeah it would be so hard to ask the other poster to fix his title
> 
> much better to disrespect him here


Sorry. I didn't mean to be a jerk. I should have phrased it better.


----------



## buckfiddious (Nov 14, 2011)

Best thing about this bike is this: It's the cheapest way to get into fatbikes and it uses all reasonably standard fatbike parts. So, drop $800 for a bike and upgrade all the parts and you're still cheaper than a new pugsley.

Figure with $1k to play with for upgrades, you could have a really nice bike out of this deal.


----------



## bhc (Sep 27, 2005)

Here is an update concerning sizes offered. I received an email from them.

Thanks for the email! 
-We'll be offering a 17, 19, and 21 in our first order...we hope to have 15's on the way shortly after. 
-Yep, The House bike shop will be stocking and selling them.
-Good eyes...we were in a rush to get the new site up and missed that important spec. Crank set will be 28/38T (better right?)
- Yes, we're working on the geo for the website...hope to have that up this week.
Cheers!
Davin


----------



## puchcobra (Nov 6, 2013)

The Minnesota is advertised now 799.95
On Sale Framed Minnesota 2.0 Fat Bike Black/White 17in 2014


----------



## Dave in Ozark (Nov 5, 2013)

Comes with a "free" set of wheels… this just keeps getting interestinger.

But what does "framed fat bike" mean?


----------



## boogman (May 21, 2012)

this minnesota company owns bd at their own game.


----------



## Slow Danger (Oct 9, 2009)

Anybody see anything about rim width on the free trail wheel set? The description says they come complete with cassette and rotors. Smell ya later Bikes Direct.


----------



## puchcobra (Nov 6, 2013)

Hey! They just raised the price to 899.95
On Sale Fat Bikes


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

There's actually a review out now with video

First Look: $899 'Minnesota' Fat Bike | Gear Review | Gear Junkie


----------



## maddslacker (Mar 13, 2009)

puchcobra said:


> Hey! They just raised the price to 899.95
> On Sale Fat Bikes


The 1.0 is $799, the 2.0 is $899.


----------



## Mplsfatty (Nov 16, 2012)

this has nothing to do with the bike but....it's nice and frosty outside for us fat riders. rubber side down!


----------



## wolfmansbro (May 25, 2004)

sizes say 16, 18 and 20. Has this changed or is that correct now?

Looking at the geometry chart it looks like the 19" Minnesota 1.0 is larger than the 20" Minnesota 2.0. 

Is the 1.0 a completely different frame from the 2.0?


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

I doubt it, they started out with 17", 19" & 21" frame sizes, then they updated the website and the numbers changed a bit. Give it a week and the two models will match.

I put down a deposit on a 2.0, now we wait.



wolfmansbro said:


> sizes say 16, 18 and 20. Has this changed or is that correct now?
> 
> Looking at the geometry chart it looks like the 19" Minnesota 1.0 is larger than the 20" Minnesota 2.0.
> 
> Is the 1.0 a completely different frame from the 2.0?


----------



## Tjaard (Aug 17, 2007)

No, it even says in both versions description that the 1.0 is longer than the 2.0. Also bob is taller on 2.0


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

Has anyone else seen or ridden one yet? I am a newbie, so I do not know the reputation of the seller / distributer. Do any of you have some insight? I am tempted to order one of the 2.0.

Thank you and take care,

Mike


----------



## duggus (May 11, 2007)

MPE said:


> Has anyone else seen or ridden one yet? I am a newbie, so I do not know the reputation of the seller / distributer. Do any of you have some insight? I am tempted to order one of the 2.0.
> 
> Thank you and take care,
> 
> Mike


This may be as close as you get to someone who has ridden one. Seriously for the deal you get for pre-order (an extra 29er wheelset)... this is a damn good deal for the components. Most everything you would need to know is in this article: First Look: $899 'Minnesota' Fat Bike | Gear Review | Gear Junkie


----------



## the mayor (Nov 18, 2004)

MPE said:


> Has anyone else seen or ridden one yet? I am a newbie, so I do not know the reputation of the seller / distributer. Do any of you have some insight? I am tempted to order one of the 2.0.
> 
> Thank you and take care,
> 
> Mike


You want to know if anyone has ridden a bike that isn't available until next year?
You might want to try the Time Travel forum....


----------



## TRAIL CRANKER (Apr 9, 2010)

the mayor said:


> You want to know if anyone has ridden a bike that isn't available until next year?
> You might want to try the Time Travel forum....


OR better yet! Put you in a time machine send you to 2014 ride the bike 1000 miles , return back from the future and write a review , so we can make a informed choice. :0 Just jokin.


----------



## Slow Danger (Oct 9, 2009)

This looks to me like the clear winner in cheap fat category, at least as long as you get the free 29er wheelset. The only question is whether the 1.0 or the 2.0 is better suited to a rider. I'd be getting rid of the Vee Missions anyways, so that's a wash. The extra gears on the 2.0 are nice, but would depend on riding conditions. Not sure that's worth the extra $100.


----------



## wolfmansbro (May 25, 2004)

Slow Danger said:


> The only question is whether the 1.0 or the 2.0 is better suited to a rider. I'd be getting rid of the Vee Missions anyways, so that's a wash. The extra gears on the 2.0 are nice, but would depend on riding conditions. Not sure that's worth the extra $100.


Take note that the 1.0 and 2.0 are two DIFFERENT frames. Both have different sizing and geometry. So I would also consider the frame size while choosing between the two.


----------



## Slow Danger (Oct 9, 2009)

wolfmansbro said:


> Take note that the 1.0 and 2.0 are two DIFFERENT frames. Both have different sizing and geometry. So I would also consider the frame size while choosing between the two.


Ah, missed that. The only difference between frames that makes me stop and think is the bb drop. If I'm reading right, the 1.0 has a 4.9 cm bb drop and the 2.0 has a 3.5 cm drop. I have no idea what that would mean in real-world terms. Otherwise, I don't see any drastic differences. Can anyone smarter about geo than me offer opinions on the geo differences between, say, the 17 inch 1.0 and the 18 inch 2.0 that would make a huge difference to the ride? I see the half degree head and seat tube angle differences, but I doubt I would notice that.


----------



## nikj (Jul 7, 2008)

Stopped in the showroom to see the new bikes and boy do they look and ride great


----------



## bhc (Sep 27, 2005)

The website for The House says back order ship on 1/30/2014. Are they available to purchase at the store? Or are these simply demos in the picture?


----------



## ReXTless (Feb 23, 2007)

nikj said:


> Stopped in the showroom to see the new bikes and boy do they look and ride great


Where's the showroom?


----------



## nikj (Jul 7, 2008)

The showroom is located in St Paul MN
The bikes are there to to see and ride on site
Availability is still predicated to be the 30th of Jan 2014


----------



## ReXTless (Feb 23, 2007)

nikj said:


> The showroom is located in St Paul MN
> The bikes are there to to see and ride on site
> Availability is still predicated to be the 30th of Jan 2014


Sorry. I'm in STP. Just wondering where in town.


----------



## nikj (Jul 7, 2008)

The house bike shop
At 200 South Owasso boulevard east St. Paul,mn


----------



## dgw2jr (Aug 17, 2011)

So it's 2 completely different frames. Interesting. It looks like the 1.0 is more traditional XC geometry with a slightly longer wheelbase and much longer top tube compared to the 2.0.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

Okay,

I just got back from a test ride at the House on the 2.0. I've been a bit skeptic up to this point but the bike rides really well. The shorter geo made the bike more playful than any other fat bike I've ridden. I agree with the gearjunkie review that it's probably not an ideal endurance bike but that's not what I'm looking for. I was also surprised that even the 20" fully built weighed in under 35lbs.

Tires - I've been discussing 'Fat Tires' for a while with friends and exchanging emails with [email protected]. This newer 120tpi Mission tire has been getting some good reviews. The only negative I could find is that I may want a slightly knobbier tire in winter for deep snow at times. That said, is was ridding around in mush on the streets and a couple inches of fresh snow (in yards) and they seemed to hold really well. The higher the TPI the softer/more supple the rubber stays in cold weather. I plan to ride this bike 365 with the 4" tires and I'm most excited about spring/summer/fall riding...and that's where I feel that the Nate's will be too knobby. So ideally I would have two sets of tires but that gets expensive. I looked at the 29er semi slick wheel set too and it looked pretty good. I did not get a chance to ride them though due to time and conditions. But it comes with rotors and cassette which I didn't realize...that will make the switch pretty slick.

Size - I'm 5'11" and the 18" was my size.

I ended up buying the 18" Silver with anodized rim/hubs. Now I just have to wait!


----------



## Jisch (Jan 12, 2004)

My problem with the Missions was the self-steer tendencies, it was really bad - around here we have a lot of rock slabs, so the tire felt perfectly fine on dirt, then I'd go up on a slab and the handlebars would twist. Its not impossible to control, but the On One floaters (while probably a lot more resistant to rolling) are much better in this regard.


----------



## ReXTless (Feb 23, 2007)

mncyclist said:


> Okay,
> 
> I just got back from a test ride at the House on the 2.0. I've been a bit skeptic up to this point but the bike rides really well. The shorter geo made the bike more playful than any other fat bike I've ridden. I agree with the gearjunkie review that it's probably not an ideal endurance bike but that's not what I'm looking for. I was also surprised that even the 20" fully built weighed in under 35lbs.
> 
> ...


Congrats! I may head up there this afternoon, just to see these things in-person.


----------



## fat_tires_are_fun (May 24, 2013)

These sound like a really good deal. Like many things, often the first to market wins. In the case of the affordable fat bike, that was BD, but as the fat bike becomes more popular, many more should enter the game at all price levels. This type of competition will surely help improve quality at all price points.
I like that this comes in a larger frame size, as I ride XL frames.


----------



## bhc (Sep 27, 2005)

If anyone gets a chance to see these at the show room, can you measure some tire clearances?


----------



## nikj (Jul 7, 2008)

Won top gear of the year award from an outside testing site

Best Of The Best... 'Top Gear' Of The Year | Gear Review | Gear Junkie


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Anybody else order one of these yet? I had been going back and forth between the Minnesota 2.0 and the Motobecane Boris X9 for the past month. 

I really wanted the Boris X9 but the uncertainty of the Feb 25th ship date and the possibility that it wouldn't ship until March 25th made me hesitate on ordering Boris X9. So I started looking at other options and time and time again I kept coming back to the Minnesota 2.0 in White and Orange.

I kept talking myself out of the Minnesota 2.0 by telling myself that it would probably only ship in early Feb and that it was only a couple of weeks more for the Boris X9 if it did ship on Feb 25th. 

Tonight I was looking on the Framed Facebook page and they are saying that the 2.0 bikes are scheduled to arrive ahead of schedule (Jan 23rd or 24th) and that was the final push I needed to place my order.

So tonight I went ahead and ordered White and Orange 2.0 in 18" and I picked the Slick 29er wheelset as the extra freebie wheelset.

Now I play the waiting game but I'm looking forward to the new bike.

A big thanks to nikj for taking those pictures at the showroom and to mncyclist for the mini-review/ride report.


----------



## duggus (May 11, 2007)

Kawidan said:


> So tonight I went ahead and ordered White and Orange 2.0 in 18" and I picked the Slick 29er wheelset as the extra freebie wheelset.


Good call. Seriously can't beat that extra wheelset deal, and I think the bikes look great as well as the specs.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

I was torn the same and decided to order one of each. A Boris X9 Large for my Son and a Med 2.0 in that same Orange as you. These orders were made back before Thanksgiving so its good to hear that the Minnesota 2.0 will be in early.


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

I also have one on order...a silver/red 2.0. I actually canceled a Boris order and switched. The extra set of wheels was the kicker for me. I am happy to hear that they may be early.

Galen


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Couple of pics that the Framed Bike people posted on their Facebook page. This is a 16" frame and the woman in the pic is over 6 feet tall.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

I am tempted by the 2.0. My wife and I could both get bikes for only a few hundred dollars more than a single Pugsley… I would probably sell the free second set of wheels since I couldn't see a reason to ride the bike with the narrow tires.. We both have great mountain bikes, road bikes and I also have a cyclocross bike. I wonder what a guy could get for the freebie wheels/tires/rotor and cassette combos??


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I borrowed one of my friends Norco Bigfoot yesterday and made the mistake of letting my GF try it out. I believe that it was a $900 mistake since she now wants a Fat Bike. So it looks like I may have to place another an order for a second 2.0. 

My other option would be to order the Boris X9 I really I could ride the 2.0 until the Boris X9 ships. I could than give the 2.0 to the GF. 

Here's the GF trying out the Bigfoot yesterday.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Snopro440 said:


> I am tempted by the 2.0. My wife and I could both get bikes for only a few hundred dollars more than a single Pugsley&#8230; I would probably sell the free second set of wheels since I couldn't see a reason to ride the bike with the narrow tires.. We both have great mountain bikes, road bikes and I also have a cyclocross bike. I wonder what a guy could get for the freebie wheels/tires/rotor and cassette combos??


They say that the wheel combo retails for $400 but I'm thinking a person could probably get $200 to $250 for them.


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

I ordered a 2.0 in white and orange with a 20" frame. The GearJunkie review and award made me finally pull the trigger. I ordered the 29" "trail wheel". I am starting to wonder if I should have ordered the slicks for a little road work / goofing around.

I am glad they might be early! I can't wait!

Take care,

Mike


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I debated between the Trail and Slick Wheelset but I've got lots of knobby 29er tires and I've got no slick 29er tires. If I do use the extra wheelset, I figured the slick wheelset would turn the bike into a nice fully rigid 29er commuter. But I have a sneaking suspicion that it's going to be a Fat Bike 12 months out of the year.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Looks like the White/Orange Color is pretty popular. According to the Framed Bike Facebook page, the 20" White/Orange is now sold out.


Framed Bikes

Heads up to anyone looking at the Minnesota Fatties! We just got word from The House Boardshop that they already sold ALL of the Minnesota 2.0 20" White/Orange.


----------



## iscariot (Oct 24, 2006)

I don't see rear spacing listed in the specs. What is the rear spacing for each? A 170 or 190 rear end? Any offset numbers?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

iscariot said:


> I don't see rear spacing listed in the specs. What is the rear spacing for each? a 170 or 190 rear end?


Rear Hub - Quando 170mm Alloy Quick Release


----------



## iscariot (Oct 24, 2006)

Kawidan said:


> Rear Hub - Quando 170mm Alloy Quick Release


Ha. I'm an idiot. Thanks for spotting that.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

I went in and rode the bikes last night at the shop. I ended up ordering a 20 inch for me, a 16 for my wife. The top tubes are short, but it wasn't too bad. I am 6'01" and the 20 inch will be fine, although I am going to put a 1 inch ride 5-7 degree sweep bar on it to make it fit me better. Quality looked ver good. I think these are the bikes that they used for the web page. The salesman said that the production versions rims would be welded, not pinned like the demos were, and some painted parts would be anodized. 

I can confirm 20 inch white/orange is out of stock , as that is what I wanted to order. So I got silver/red (wayyyyy better in person than on the web) and got my wife a 16 inch white/orange. 

I was told to expect to pick them up Feb 3-7th.

I am going to sell both set of the extra wheels with the 29 inch slick tires. If anyone is interested in them , let me know. They are complete, 170 rear hub, 135 front, rotors, 11-34 9 speed cassette, tubes and tires. PM me about pricing if you are interested.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

For those who have purchased the 2.0, do you plan on changing the gearing or just leaving the 38/28T in the front?


----------



## Swedishmafia (Jan 9, 2014)

I rode one yesterday at the House and am mildly concerned that it may be a bit small for me. I am around 6'3 or 6'4 and the 20" seemed somewhat small....but maybe not small enough for me to avoid the amazing deal on this bike. Do you guys think a new stem and riser bar would be enough of a fix?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Swedishmafia said:


> I rode one yesterday at the House and am mildly concerned that it may be a bit small for me. I am around 6'3 or 6'4 and the 20" seemed somewhat small....but maybe not small enough for me to avoid the amazing deal on this bike. Do you guys think a new stem and riser bar would be enough of a fix?


According to the people at The House, the lady in his picture is 6 feet tall and she's on the 16" frame. She had the seat post pretty much all the way up and she doesn't look overly cramped on that frame.

Were you able to get the seat height in a comfortable position during your test ride?

On the The-House Website in the question and answers, someone asked:

Dan F. asked: I'm 6' 4" is the 20" frame going to be too small for me? Dec 15, 2013 
Answer this · Send to friends Good question? Yes (2) No (0)

Mark SStaff: The Framed MN 2.0 20" Should be a solid fit for you Dec 22, 2013 
Reply to Mark S


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

I am glad I ordered my 20" White and Orange 2.0 right after New Year's and have a confirmation email!

I hope the sizing is good. I am just barely 6'3". Looking at the photo above and the comments on The House site, it should be ok.

Can't wait.

Take care,

Mike


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> Anybody else order one of these yet? I had been going back and forth between the Minnesota 2.0 and the Motobecane Boris X9 for the past month.
> 
> I really wanted the Boris X9 but the uncertainty of the Feb 25th ship date and the possibility that it wouldn't ship until March 25th made me hesitate on ordering Boris X9. So I started looking at other options and time and time again I kept coming back to the Minnesota 2.0 in White and Orange.
> 
> ...


I ordered the white and orange 2.0 back in november and I'm stoked to see them arrive. Customer service told me they might have them in as early as the 20th, which means that I might have it for my bike packing trip to Pisgah in February.

It seems so crazy to pay $940 and not see a return for almost 3 months


----------



## steveohio (Dec 6, 2013)

Truitnow said:


> I was torn the same and decided to order one of each. A Boris X9 Large for my Son and a Med 2.0 in that same Orange as you. These orders were made back before Thanksgiving so its good to hear that the Minnesota 2.0 will be in early.


Please check back and give us a review as far as which one you prefer and why. I had been thinking about getting a Bikes Direct fatty, as I have a Ti Motobecane already thats awsome.

The extra wheel set isn't something I'd probably get any use out of, but like a few have mentioned, you could sell them to recover some cost. But really, I'm just looking for a quality cheap fat bike. I've been eyeing down those (gasp) Mongoose Beasts for awhile, but for what I'd have to put into it in upgrades makes me wonder what the point would be when I could just get a complete for abit more.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Well we now know that the 2.0 will wheelie at will.
Check out the video :thumbsup:

Instagram


----------



## RDGear (Jan 12, 2014)

I'm looking at the Minnesota 2.0. I'd like to put a wider tire on it...maybe the Surly Bud and Lou. Or, something very close. Would this fit on the Minnesota 2.0? 

I, too, am deciding between the Minnesota 2.0 and the Motobecane FB4 Elite. Any thoughts or experience people might relay?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

According to Framed Bike's Facebook page, they are saying that it's quite possible that the bikes are going to ship on January 17th. That's less than 4 days away. Here's to hoping.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Also a couple cool pics they posted on their Facebook Page


----------



## duggus (May 11, 2007)

RDGear said:


> I'm looking at the Minnesota 2.0. I'd like to put a wider tire on it...maybe the Surly Bud and Lou. Or, something very close. Would this fit on the Minnesota 2.0?


Lots of info right here in this very thread you commented on. I'll help though so you don't have to go through the work of looking like most have to: No, the bike was designed around 3.8 - 4" tires.



RDGear said:


> I, too, am deciding between the Minnesota 2.0 and the Motobecane FB4 Elite. Any thoughts or experience people might relay?


Again... threads all over with opinions... lots under the Bikes Direct thread.

Thumbs up :thumbsup:


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

Kawidan said:


> According to Framed Bike's Facebook page, they are saying that it's quite possible that the bikes are going to ship on January 17th. That's less than 4 days away. Here's to hoping.


That would rock!! My group has 5 to pick up, it'd be nice to get them early. Everyone post up if u get the call!!!


----------



## RDGear (Jan 12, 2014)

duggus said:


> Lots of info right here in this very thread you commented on. I'll help though so you don't have to go through the work of looking like most have to: No, the bike was designed around 3.8 - 4" tires.
> 
> Again... threads all over with opinions... lots under the Bikes Direct thread.
> 
> Thumbs up :thumbsup:


Thanks, but just because the bike is "designed" around 3.8-4" tires doesn't mean that you couldn't put on a wider tire... people have done that with the FB4 even though it's "designed" for 4" tires.


----------



## duggus (May 11, 2007)

RDGear said:


> Thanks, but just because the bike is "designed" around 3.8-4" tires doesn't mean that you couldn't put on a wider tire... people have done that with the FB4 even though it's "designed" for 4" tires.


You really start to run into clearance issues then. You have to leave room for snow and mud pack. Also, that is why bikes are now going to a 190 rear, so they can fit a 4.8 centered with no sacrifice to drivetrain. People who have stuffed bigger tires than a bike is built for usually sacrifice clearance and also modify the cassette by removing cogs. Also the FB4's are designed to fit a 4.25 according to the man himself.

There is no way you will fit a 4.8 on the rear of a Minnesota or an FB4... they are simply massive compared to a 4.7 BFL even.


----------



## iscariot (Oct 24, 2006)

duggus said:


> There is no way you will fit a 4.8 on the rear of a Minnesota or an FB4... they are simply massive compared to a 4.7 BFL even.


Except for the pictures and reviews of people who have actually put 4.8 bud and lou on the FB4 in the motobecane thread.


----------



## Super Puppy (Jan 14, 2014)

Would the 1.0 be better suited to longer rides?


----------



## duggus (May 11, 2007)

iscariot said:


> Except for the pictures and reviews of people who have actually put 4.8 bud and lou on the FB4 in the motobecane thread.


With modifications. Shaving side knobs and having to run higher pressure so you don't rub on rider weight is rediculous. Just run a Nate if you want aggressive and good clearance. 4.8's aren't all they are cracked up to be. I love mine for when I ride thick mud, but on snow and all other surfaces, 3.8's would do.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Framed Minnesota 1.0 & 2.0 Fatbike Facebook Group

https://www.facebook.com/groups/691226087566074/


----------



## iscariot (Oct 24, 2006)

duggus said:


> With modifications. Shaving side knobs and having to run higher pressure so you don't rub on rider weight is rediculous. Just run a Nate if you want aggressive and good clearance. 4.8's aren't all they are cracked up to be. I love mine for when I ride thick mud, but on snow and all other surfaces, 3.8's would do.


Actually they can run up to 7 to 9 pounds, without contact. Shaved knobs of you want to run higher pressure than 9 pounds, which doesn't really make sense for snow riding.

As far as "having to run higher pressure so you don't rub on rider weight"... as I learned, more pressure equals less clearance. Less pressure equals more clearance. Not a bad thing with regard to fat bikes on snow. The aforementioned pressures are in a very usable / practical range for winter riding.

So bud and lou on an FB4 for snow riding is fine, according to reviews and evidence. Chainline has 3/8" clearance.

Personally I'd run nates too. But it is inaccurate to say, as you did previously, that there is "no way a 4.8 would fit the ... FB4."

Now back to this thread topic...

[/thread jack]


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Looks like the White/Orange 16" are also sold out. That only leaves the 18" available in White/Orange.


----------



## simonj (Apr 8, 2012)

I would wager a bet that its not a frame clearance issue...but rather drivetrain.

My Norco Bigfoot is advertised as "designed for 4" tires" but I'm running a 4.8 Bud up front with a 3.8 Nate in the back. A Lou rear would definitely clear the frame but I'd have to change out the crank to get the proper chain clearance. I surmise that this would be the case with the Minnesota as well.


----------



## duggus (May 11, 2007)

simonj said:


> I would wager a bet that its not a frame clearance issue...but rather drivetrain.
> 
> My Norco Bigfoot is advertised as "designed for 4" tires" but I'm running a 4.8 Bud up front with a 3.8 Nate in the back. A Lou rear would definitely clear the frame but I'd have to change out the crank to get the proper chain clearance. I surmise that this would be the case with the Minnesota as well.


^ This. It's the whole reason bikes are going to 190 rear for 4.8 tires and why the moonlander is offset 28mm with a 135 hub. Lots of people have fit 4.8 on their Mukluks and so on... but usually at the cost of a couple gears and shaved side knobs. I was merely answering the other guys question - you can't just throw a 4.8 on a 170 rear bike and do nothing, and it will just work. I guess I should have been more specific/detailed.


----------



## PerraHunter (Nov 3, 2013)

Help me out please, I'm a confused noob. The Minnesota 1 and 2 have different frame geometries, with the 2 having a shorter top tube? Now I know little about geometry and even less about fat bikes (something I'd like to change). What does that really mean as far as riding the bike? Would that difference be noticeable? Does that mean the 1 would be a better snow/sand bike and the 2 be a better fire road/single track dirt bike? 

If I got a fat bike, I could see myself riding unimproved forest roads and paths, getting to the never fished ponds, and places where my hard tail Rockhopper would not enjoy going. Never say never but I don't see this as being a snow bike, I mean our annual snow storm has already come and gone.

Thanks.


----------



## plaindave (Jul 22, 2008)

Does anybody know if the rear hub is a new style cassette freehub or the old style screw on freewheel? The Quando website only shows one 170mm hub and it's a screw on style. I haven't seen that used in over 20 years. Not sure id want one.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

PerraHunter said:


> Help me out please, I'm a confused noob. The Minnesota 1 and 2 have different frame geometries, with the 2 having a shorter top tube? Now I know little about geometry and even less about fat bikes (something I'd like to change). What does that really mean as far as riding the bike? Would that difference be noticeable? Does that mean the 1 would be a better snow/sand bike and the 2 be a better fire road/single track dirt bike?
> 
> If I got a fat bike, I could see myself riding unimproved forest roads and paths, getting to the never fished ponds, and places where my hard tail Rockhopper would not enjoy going. Never say never but I don't see this as being a snow bike, I mean our annual snow storm has already come and gone.
> 
> Thanks.


It appears that the 1.0 has a slightly longer wheelbase and the top tube is longer so I'm thinking that the 1.0 would probably be a more comfy bike for longer distance riding while the 2.0 will be more playful and nimble but probably not as comfy over a long distance.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

I called the House, and talked to Mark. He said he has no idea where the earlier date came from. He said the feb 1-5 ship dates are what they are expecting. Sorry to disappont, but it appears the wait will be a couple more weeks, like we expected anyways!


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

All earlier shipping dates have been coming from Framed Bikes on their Facebook Page.


Framed Bikes Jon, I'm sorry about that...it wasn't my intention to tease. We just like to push the bikes in nar nar conditions...always testing. Good news also...the 2.0's are coming in ahead of schedule. We're hoping the 23rd or 24th of this month.

Like · 1 · January 2 at 12:05pm



Framed Bikes Kevin Stulen You might not have caught wind yet but The House Boardshop Might be shipping out their orders as soon as the 17th!


Like · Reply · 6 · January 13 at 6:33pm


Framed Bikes We just got word that they hope to be assembling Framed Bikes around the 20th. A few days later than hopped but still way ahead of schedule.

Like · Reply · January 14 at 10:20pm


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Why, why, WHY?! ... Did I have to see this?!?!

A 18" white/orange MN 2.0 with the extra 29er slick tires was just put on my VISA...

I've been wanting a fat bike and a townie bike path bike. This bike, with the free wheelset, covers both.

My fiance' is going to shoot me. She wants to redo the bathroom and I just bought another MTB...


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Congrats hockiebrett, that's the exact same setup I ordered.

The only way to remedy this situation is to order a second one for the fiance. LOL

I was planning on ordering one and I borrowed a friend's Norco Bigfoot for a day and let the GF try it out. She had a blast and she now wants a Fat Bike. So I told her I'd order one first and once we see the sizing of the 18" we can order her one too.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

It's weird that the shop wouldn't have any of this info..

I am not going to get too excited about an earlier ship date, hopefully we get news they have landed in Minnesota, and I can bring my truck down to load it up with the bikes my family and friends ordered!!



Kawidan said:


> All earlier shipping dates have been coming from Framed Bikes on their Facebook Page.
> 
> Framed Bikes Jon, I'm sorry about that...it wasn't my intention to tease. We just like to push the bikes in nar nar conditions...always testing. Good news also...the 2.0's are coming in ahead of schedule. We're hoping the 23rd or 24th of this month.
> 
> ...


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Someone asked Framed Bikes if the bikes would be shipping on the 17th, when would they be available to pickup in store at The House. They replied with

"Framed Bikes We just got word that they hope to be assembling Framed Bikes around the 20th. A few days later than hopped but still way ahead of schedule."

So I was hoping what they meant was that They are going to be so busy shipping all your bikes on the 17th that they are only going to have time to start assembling on the 20th" LOL Here's to hoping.

I'm planning on doing an adventure race with mine on Feb 8th, so as long as it comes in before that date, I'll be happy. But I'm really hoping they ship early next week so that it gives me a chance to give it a few shake down rides before the race.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Kawidan said:


> The only way to remedy this situation is to order a second one for the fiance. LOL


I tried that... It hangs in the shed :-/

I kept telling her I had until June (the wedding) to buy everything I've ever wanted on 'my money'... She thought I was kidding...

We've been engaged for a year and during that time I've:
bought a new (to me) SUV
upgraded both mtb's (sold two, so just upgrade costs)
bought 3 firearms
Doing a 27.5 conversion
Bought a 27.5 Fox 34, debating pulling the trigger on a Pike...

lol


----------



## FrdSHOx3 (Sep 10, 2009)

I ordered a 2.0 Black/white size 16 after much debating between the FB4 Elite. The component offerings on the 2.0 were the deciding factor for me. 

The only thing that has me concerned are the hubs. Quando? not very good reviews. I priced out replacements and I can live with that cost.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

I figure low engagement hubs won't matter that much on snow?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I was dreaming about a set of these last night LOL

Pro 2 Evo Fatsno Hubs - Pro 2 Evo Fatsno Hubs - Product Details

I run the Pro 2 Evo Hubs on my Superfly100 and really like them.


----------



## duggus (May 11, 2007)

hokiebrett said:


> I figure low engagement hubs won't matter that much on snow?


Actually, quick engagement hubs are always better... especially at a slow stall and go pace like in the snow.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

Any updated news on the eta? Apparentely on Framed's facebook page, they are updating things, but facebook is blocked on all my work computers...


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Nope nothing has been posted about ETA on the Framed Facebook since the last message that said

"Framed Bikes We just got word that they hope to be assembling Framed Bikes around the 20th. A few days later than hopped but still way ahead of schedule.

Like · Reply · January 14 at 10:20pm"


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Looks like we should have more information early Monday morning. This was posted on the Framed Facebook page


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Both the White/Orange and Black Minnesota 2.0 are now showing up as In Stock. They were both showing up as back ordered yesterday. Only 18" left in the White/Orange and 16 and 18" in the Black. So they should be shipping real soon since they show Ships Immediately for the 2 colors in stock.

White/Orange Minnesota 2.0

On Sale Framed Minnesota 2.0 Fat Bike White/Orange 2014

Black Minnesota 2.0

On Sale Framed Minnesota 2.0 Fat Bike Black 2014

Both the Red/Silver and Black/White are still showing up as a back ordered.

Silver/Red

On Sale Framed Minnesota 2.0 Fat Bike Silver/Red 2014

Black/White

On Sale Framed Minnesota 2.0 Fat Bike Black/White 2014


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

Just my luck...I have a Silver/Red ordered!

Galen


----------



## FrdSHOx3 (Sep 10, 2009)

I called this morning to switch from the black/white to the black/black that shows in stock and was told that the they are not in stock and the "In Stock" status is an error. Sigh...

The service rep also told me that the stock dates are usually very accurate.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Just posted on the Framed Bike Facebook page.


Framed Bikes

Fat Bike Update! The bikes are at customs getting inspected which is causing a short delay. We should know more soon on an incoming date to The House Boardshop


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

Oh man... I was really hoping to hear some early shipping news today! I hope Customs doesn't hold things up too much.

Does anyone know the width of the Fattie Slims rims that come with the package?


Also, what is the relationship between Framed and The House?

Waiting patiently (sort of)!

Take care,

Mike


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

FrdSHOx3 said:


> I called this morning to switch from the black/white to the black/black


Honestly, I'd keep the black/white. I've read black rims like to collect snow on the trails. They warm in the sun then freeze again when snow hits them.


----------



## FrdSHOx3 (Sep 10, 2009)

hokiebrett said:


> Honestly, I'd keep the black/white. I've read black rims like to collect snow on the trails. They warm in the sun then freeze again when snow hits them.


I did keep the black/white combo. I was trying to be slick and do the switch to what was supposedly in stock. :0

Looks like they are on the way, keeping fingers crossed.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

FrdSHOx3 said:


> I did keep the black/white combo. I was trying to be slick and do the switch to what was supposedly in stock. :0
> 
> Looks like they are on the way, keeping fingers crossed.


I think the black/white looks really slick.

I almost went with it, but I've never owned a white bike and the orange rims just looked cool and funky... I mean hey, it's a fat bike, make it funky right?!


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

Patiently, or not Patiently waiting over here. I have a bikepacking trip in Pisgah scheduled for the 6-9th of February. All of my accessories are sitting in the garage with panniers, frame bags, hammocks, bags, you name it.. Just need a bike to put it on so I don't have to take the 29er!

Cmon customs!


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

crankdriven said:


> Patiently, or not Patiently waiting over here. I have a bikepacking trip in Pisgah scheduled for the 6-9th of February. All of my accessories are sitting in the garage with panniers, frame bags, hammocks, bags, you name it.. Just need a bike to put it on so I don't have to take the 29er!
> 
> Cmon customs!


I've got a 6 hour adventure race planned for Feb 8th so I'm patiently waiting for the bike to arrive. I'll be happy as long as I get it before the 8th but the sooner I get it the better. I would like to give it a few shake down rides before setting out on a 6 hour race.

Let me know how you enjoy Pishgah on the Fat Bike. A few of my friends have done the 5 day stage race down there the past 2 years. I'm considering heading down there next September to race it but not on the Minnesota LOL


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Anybody knows what kind of crank it comes with?


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

zorg said:


> Anybody knows what kind of crank it comes with?


From the website:
Minnesota 2.0 White Orange - Framed Bikes

Crankset - Truvativ 28/38T Chain Rings


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Is that the X.5?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

zorg said:


> Is that the X.5?


Nope it appears to be a SRAM Truvativ with a 100mm ISIS Bottom Bracket.

This is what the SRAM X5 Fatbike Crank with the 100mm GXP Bottom Bracket looks like.


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Kawidan said:


> Nope it appears to be a SRAM Truvativ with a 100mm ISIS Bottom Bracket.
> 
> This is what the SRAM X5 Fatbike Crank with the 100mm GXP Bottom Bracket looks like.
> 
> View attachment 863948


Got it. Can it take a 22/34 104BCD chainrings?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I'm assuming they can but we won't know for sure until we get them and we can measure the BCD on the crank.

I'm not sure how ideal the 38/28T gearing will be in the front so I'm hoping it's 104BCD since I'm playing with the idea of converting it to 1x10 by possibly putting a Single Race Face 30T Narrow Wide Chainring in the front and putting a 10 speed cassette in the rear with a 42T OneUp Component Cog in the rear. I've already got the 10 speed XT Cassette, Shifter and chain so I would need the 10 speed rear derailleur.

I haven't ordered anything yet since I want to see what type of rear hub comes with the bike. Someone on here had said that the only 170mm rear hub they could find that Quando made was of the screw-on threaded type versus the more common regular splined freehub.


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

The House page is now showing "Backorder Ship on 1/24/14". That is a little sooner than the original 1/30/14 date, but not quite as good as some of the rumors. Either way, I am stoked to get my bike!

Take care,

Mike


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Looks like the bikes have cleared customs and are on their way to Minnesota. This was just posted on the Framed Bike Facebook Page. 


Framed Bikes 

about a minute ago near Minneapolis, MN, United States.

Our Minnesota 2.0 and 1.0's are on the move again and headed to St.Paul MN!


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> Looks like the bikes have cleared customs and are on their way to Minnesota. This was just posted on the Framed Bike Facebook Page.
> 
> Framed Bikes
> 
> ...


Patiently waiting. Originally when they thought they would get them in on the 20th, they told me it's possible to have by the 27th. I'm hoping they get them with 1/24 and I'll have it the 1st or so. Fingers crossed. Need it by the 4th so I'll have time to get 50 miles or so breakin before my trip.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Hopefully not another false alarm, but all Minnesota 2.0 are showing as in-stock with a shipping status of Ship within 24 hours. When we had the false alarm In Stock on Tuesday, the status said ships immediately. So hopefully this is a good sign. I also noticed that the White/Orange 16" is once again available to order for anybody who missed out on one.


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> Hopefully not another false alarm, but all Minnesota 2.0 are showing as in-stock with a shipping status of Ship within 24 hours. When we had the false alarm In Stock on Tuesday, the status said ships immediately. So hopefully this is a good sign. I also noticed that the White/Orange 16" is once again available to order for anybody who missed out on one.
> 
> View attachment 864273


Just emailed the rep I've been talking with since November. They've been giving me accurate timelines since day 1 in communication. I'll post up what I hear. I've been happy with customer service and their willingness to help.


----------



## rondean (Dec 6, 2013)

I'm starting to get excited now! 30 years ago I quit bmx, and started smoking cigs. This New Years, I quit cigs, and waiting for my old-man bmx fatbike to arrive. Gonna toss this thing in the rv and ride everywhere from Mt Ranier to Daytona beach. Fun and exploration, disguised as exercise. Wondering, since I've ordered the black/black, would it be considered disrespectful to Framed if I took the stickers off? Not a big deal, just thinking it will look sinister.


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

rondean said:


> would it be considered disrespectful to Framed if I took the stickers off? Not a big deal, just thinking it will look sinister.


Depends if they are under a layer of clear coat, at this price point, I doubt they are.


----------



## FrdSHOx3 (Sep 10, 2009)

The first thing I intend on doing is removing the white splash "Framed" logo on the frame and fork. Either it will be peeled off or sanded and painted over flat black.


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

2LO4U2C said:


> Depends if they are under a layer of clear coat, at this price point, I doubt they are.


I hope this. I want to peel the stickers off my white one. All the fork stickers, and the splash over the framed wording.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

crankdriven said:


> I hope this. I want to peel the stickers off my white one. All the fork stickers, and the splash over the framed wording.


No news from Customer Service crankdriven?


----------



## steveohio (Dec 6, 2013)

Why would they care?
Personally I like to debadge all my bikes. I think it just looks alot better and cleaner.


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

Hope they are actually in this time, still no tracking # yet.


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

Just told the bikes are in but 29er wheels are not so bikes will not ship until wheels come in. Working on a plan B.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Yetiski said:


> Just told the bikes are in but 29er wheels are not so bikes will not ship until wheels come in. Working on a plan B.


Are you working on a plan B or are they working on a plan B?


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

Both, but it will not happen. Now they say maybe next wed, this sucks !!


----------



## finny1999 (Aug 11, 2007)

I was just browsing Ebay and there's 2.0s listed from DJ Boardshop for$849.95 showing delivery on or before next Wednesday. So it looks like that free wheelset ends up costing $90 bucks including shipping...


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

WOW, that blows. What is even worse is that $90 wheelset is the phony reason they will not ship. Also makes sense why they take the $$$ up front before shipping. Never have seen that before, always get charged the day it gets shipped.


----------



## imflynt (Jan 23, 2014)

Hi guys first time posting, I ordered about a month ago and have been following this post for weeks, was just on the House site and now it seems they are back ordered till 4-1-14!!!!
I think Bikes Direct will have theirs first! Reason I ordered was the 2 wheel sets but by waiting for this bike the winter will be long gone!!!!
Might have to cancel!


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

Can the order be cancelled ?


----------



## LosPollos (Jan 23, 2014)

I'm in the same boat. It was a toss up between the Minnesota 2.0 and the BikesDirect Fantom models. The concerns with the Minnesota were the hubs, BB5 brakes, BB, and crank but I was willing to overlook it for the free wheelset and better tires. However now the price difference on eBay without the wheels seriously dilutes the value of the wheelset (for $90 its still not bad). With the shipping delay because of the free wheelset this looks like a cancel for me. I'll either buy it from eBay without the extra wheelset or go with BikesDirect.


----------



## imflynt (Jan 23, 2014)

I'd say to save face The house should ship the bikes now then the wheel set later!

I emailed the seller on ebay, I want to know if they physically have they bike or if it ships from somewhere else,

they have the same shipping map as the House!


----------



## LosPollos (Jan 23, 2014)

Yetiski said:


> Can the order be cancelled ?


I called customer support and canceled. No questions asked.


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

Only the white/orange and black/white are showing backordered. The silver/red and black/black are showing in stock. I imagine that the backorder bikes listed are already sold out and the next shipment is due in April. 

Galen


----------



## Roaming50 (Apr 30, 2009)

The White/Orange in 18" still shows as in stock. I'm tempted but have not much snow at the moment and getting yet another bike would lead to marital stress so I'm watching this one from the sidelines for now.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

On the white/orange, the 20" has been sold out for awhile. If you go to the webpage for the White/Orange and select the 16" or 18", they show as in stock. If you select the 20", it says Backordered until 04/01/2014. This is probably when they expect their next delivery of 20".

When we originally ordered the bikes, they said that they would be backordered until Jan 30th. If the wheels show up next Wednesday, we will be right on target for the original estimated shipping date.

It would of been nice to get them a bit early but they are still on schedule to what they originally stated would be the original ship date.


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Ordered a black & white one earlier this week. Customer service just e-mailed me to tell me that it's supposed to ship early next week.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

zorg said:


> Ordered a black & white one earlier this week. Customer service just e-mailed me to tell me that it's supposed to ship early next week.


Just talked to Customer Service and they said the same.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Thanks for the update guys.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

At least this stops me from going down the road to pick up an X9 Beargrease...."mo money in the pocket".


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

truitnow said:


> just talked to customer service and they said the same.


x3...


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

It seems that everyone who ordered a Minnesota 2.0, Motobecane Fantom FB4 Pro and Elite, and the Nashbar Fatbike are all patiently waiting for their bikes to show up. 

As long as the others don't start showing up in the next few days, I'm going to stay calm and wait for my Minnesota to come in.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

When I ordered mine a few weeks ago, the man said that they would come in around Feb 1st, Ship by Feb 5th. As far as I am concerned we are ahead of schedule, and if I get it earlier thats great, but if it is feb 1-5, thats what I had been expecting!


----------



## durielk (Jan 29, 2010)

I was looking at Fat's, how much to these bikes weight with mid range components?
Can't find any info on the www.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

durielk said:


> I was looking at Fat's, how much to these bikes weight with mid range components?
> Can't find any info on the www.


According to the GearJunkie review, the 2.0 weight 34lbs 14 ounces. Here was the quote

"It weighed 34 pounds, 14 ounces on our scale covered in dirt and slush from the trail."

From this review

First Look: $899 'Minnesota' Fat Bike | Gear Review | Gear Junkie


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

durielk said:


> I was looking at Fat's, how much to these bikes weight with mid range components?
> Can't find any info on the www.


----------



## durielk (Jan 29, 2010)

Thks, I guess I was on another www site.


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

The bikes have been in for a week now and they are holding them because of the extra wheel set not coming in. That is why they are selling them on E bay without the 29er wheels. Go to E bay and put in Framed fat bike 2.0 they sold a bunch already and only have a few left.


----------



## Pancake Adventure (Aug 14, 2006)

hokiebrett said:


> Honestly, I'd keep the black/white. I've read black rims like to collect snow on the trails. They warm in the sun then freeze again when snow hits them.


No they don't. That is a complete falsehood.

Trust me.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Pancake Adventure said:


> No they don't. That is a complete falsehood.
> 
> Trust me.


Apparently my thoughts + $1 will buy you a cup of coffee. Lol


----------



## FrdSHOx3 (Sep 10, 2009)

I cancelled my order last night. Too much shenanigans... Plus my card was never charged. I already have a 29r so the wheels were not a factor for me. I was going to order the Ebay version but waiting to here when it would ship.


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

Yetiski said:


> The bikes have been in for a week now and they are holding them because of the extra wheel set not coming in. That is why they are selling them on E bay without the 29er wheels. Go to E bay and put in Framed fat bike 2.0 they sold a bunch already and only have a few left.


They must think that the wheels will be in shortly behind it, otherwise, I think it would be more important to deliver to deadlines and pay the extra shipping for wheels, than to hold back on the bikes with the wheels people need.


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

I'm surprised how worked up people get over a few days, kinda a small detail for something that you will own for a couple years and scheduling any event based on a web order will always be risky. From a dealers point of view, delivering early and keeping the excitement up is good, but it might be best to keep quiet about shipping early until you have solid information and can send out tracking numbers.


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

I would rather see the bike sooner, last week and get the wheels later or not at all and save the $90 at their E bay price with free shipping. The extra wheel set seemed kind of shady anyways. If I was out to buy a 29er wheel set that one would not even be in my top 10 list of wheels to buy.


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

I see the extra wheels as a pair of hubs to build up a set of Surly wheels on.


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

2LO4U2C said:


> I'm surprised how worked up people get over a few days, kinda a small detail for something that you will own for a couple years and scheduling any event based on a web order will always be risky. From a dealers point of view, delivering early and keeping the excitement up is good, but it might be best to keep quiet about shipping early until you have solid information and can send out tracking numbers.


I'm not sure the term "worked up" is used correctly. Most of the stuff I'm seeing is people who have events already scheduled(not around fatbike specifics) and would love to use their new bike if possible. I have a Marin hardtail 29r that I'll take if it doesn't work out. Fat bikes have that fun, special feel...so it's only natural that people want to use them.  No one is upset with Framed, at least I'm not.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

As has been posted by several others, it looks like the 2.0 are shipping on Monday.

The latest update from Framed Bike's Facebook Page as of 5 minutes ago.


----------



## LosPollos (Jan 23, 2014)

Yetiski said:


> I would rather see the bike sooner, last week and get the wheels later or not at all and save the $90 at their E bay price with free shipping. The extra wheel set seemed kind of shady anyways. If I was out to buy a 29er wheel set that one would not even be in my top 10 list of wheels to buy.


+1

My only gripe, and its a small one, is the added cost for the cheap wheelset. They should have offered an option to buy the bike without the extra wheels and add the wheels for $90, rather than try to pawn them off as free. This wouldn't have mattered if they hadn't decided to sell it on eBay for $90 less without the extra wheels, but the cat is out the bag now.

I'm sure many would have preferred to pocket the $90 and get their bike earlier.

Ohh well. Either way, its a good buy.



2LO4U2C said:


> I see the extra wheels as a pair of hubs to build up a set of Surly wheels on.


 The quando hubs are probably my least favorite thing on the Minnesota 2.0. The last quando hubs I had were really, really bad. Granted they were a different size. I hope the ones on the Framed bikes are better. *fingers crossed*


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I agree I never owned a bike with Quando Hubs but from what I've read the reviews haven't been favorable.

But I'm not going to knock them until I try them. The good thing is that we have a spare 170 hub that can be cannibalized from the 29er wheelset if needed but I see a Hope Pro 2 Evo 170mm Fatsnow Hub in my near future 

Amazon.com: Hope Pro 2 Evo Rear Fat Bike Hub QR 170mm 32h Disc Red: Sports & Outdoors


----------



## finny1999 (Aug 11, 2007)

LosPollos said:


> +1
> 
> My only gripe, and its a small one, is the added cost for the cheap wheelset. They should have offered an option to buy the bike without the extra wheels and add the wheels for $90, rather than try to pawn them off as free. This wouldn't have mattered if they hadn't decided to sell it on eBay for $90 less without the extra wheels, but the cat is out the bag now.
> 
> ...


This was the primary reason I didnt order this bike. They could advertise free all they want but I had a feeling there was a cost associated with it. For someone looking for multi purposing a bike this is great but I didnt need another 29er hardtail and counting on selling the extra wheelset to offset cost never works out. I wish they would have offered a 29+ wheeelset as an option, even at additional cost I would have been all over it.


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

Hey All,

I just hung up with The House Customer service. They wanted to verify my credit card info (billing address different than shipping address). She said they would be shipping mine Monday and it should arrive Thursday! She was real cool and nice. Even though I was hoping it would arrive earlier, it is still shipping earlier than I was told when I ordered, so all is good.

Kawidan, thanks for all your efforts and posts about these bikes. I appreciate it.

Take care,

Mike


----------



## WiscoHyz (Jan 8, 2014)

mncyclist said:


> Okay,
> 
> I just got back from a test ride at the House on the 2.0. I've been a bit skeptic up to this point but the bike rides really well. The shorter geo made the bike more playful than any other fat bike I've ridden. I agree with the gearjunkie review that it's probably not an ideal endurance bike but that's not what I'm looking for. I was also surprised that even the 20" fully built weighed in under 35lbs.
> 
> ...


mncyclist,

Glad to hear someone actually got to test ride one of these. I realize they wanted to make this a maneuverable ride, but that top tube length looks ridiculously short. I want to pull the trigger on one but am torn between an 18" and 20", but even the TT length of the 20" is shorter than most. Does anyone else have any first hand experience with the fit?? 5'11" w/ 33" inseam here

Thanks!


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Glad to report that someone local got their bike today so they do exist LOL

This was just posted on the Framed Minnesota Fatbikes Facebook Group

https://www.facebook.com/groups/691226087566074/696972850324731/?notif_t=group_activity


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

WiscoHyz said:


> mncyclist,
> 
> Glad to hear someone actually got to test ride one of these. I realize they wanted to make this a maneuverable ride, but that top tube length looks ridiculously short. I want to pull the trigger on one but am torn between an 18" and 20", but even the TT length of the 20" is shorter than most. Does anyone else have any first hand experience with the fit?? 5'11" w/ 33" inseam here
> 
> Thanks!


I am 6'1" with a 33" inseam and ordered the 20" after test riding both the 18 & 20. I really couldn't tell much of a difference between them however I only road each bike for about 10 minutes in the parking lot. I'd suggest calling them and asking for the bike shop. The House is also a LBS and are very helpful.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## WiscoHyz (Jan 8, 2014)

mn_biker said:


> I am 6'1" with a 33" inseam and ordered the 20" after test riding both the 18 & 20. I really couldn't tell much of a difference between them however I only road each bike for about 10 minutes in the parking lot. I'd suggest calling them and asking for the bike shop. The House is also a LBS and are very helpful.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Thanks for the info mn_biker. Looking at the geometry, there doesn't seem to be that much difference between the 18 and 20. They both seem to be on the "cramped" side. Did you get this feeling riding it? What are your other bike sizes, if you don't mind me asking. I don't know that I want to wait until april to get the 20 when the 18 is in stock. Guess I will call and talk to the bike shop. Thanks again.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Couple pics of the real thing.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

WiscoHyz said:


> Thanks for the info mn_biker. Looking at the geometry, there doesn't seem to be that much difference between the 18 and 20. They both seem to be on the "cramped" side. Did you get this feeling riding it? What are your other bike sizes, if you don't mind me asking. I don't know that I want to wait until april to get the 20 when the 18 is in stock. Guess I will call and talk to the bike shop. Thanks again.


Cockpit did not feel cramped on either. Ride just felt much more fun and nimble like a sports car, where the Pugs I demoed earlier in the day felt like a station wagon from the 80's in comparison.

I own a large Trek and every bike I have ever demo'd was a size large.


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Kawidan said:


> Couple pics of the real thing.
> 
> View attachment 864872
> 
> ...


Looks pretty good. My plan is to replace the rear derailleur and the crank rings right away with my spare parts. Should be a hoot. Let's see how fast they ship.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

For those wondering, the decals appear to be under the clear coat. I know some people were wondering that.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

Did you pick yours up?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Nope mine has to ship but 2 guys on the Facebook Group picked theirs up today. One guys just posted a mini-review and it sounds promising. Here's what he had to say.

Just got back from my first ride. About and hour, 7 miles, on snow packed city roads. I do have one complaint. I'm cold, but that's about it. From a road biker looking for some winter fun and fitness I would have to agree with the write up on GearJunkie. You are definitely over the bar and it has a lively, fun feel. At 6'3" on the 20in by the end of the ride I felt like I wanted just about an inch more of reach, (maybe used to road bike?) but I'm sure I can tweak the setup a bit to achieve that. Probably just slide the saddle back?) The best compliment I could give it was after riding it a few blocks I stopped thinking about the bike and was just having fun being outside in the winter. When I got home, I was cold, but couldn't put it away right away, had two do a few extra laps in the alley.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Sounds good. Wow those wine rims and hubs look nice. The House pics on the site really give no justice to that grey red combo.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Truitnow said:


> Sounds good. Wow those wine rims and hubs look nice. The House pics on the site really give no justice to that grey red combo.


Yup I'm also really digging the Silver/Red combo. Those anodized rims look some nice. I have the White/Orange ordered but if I order a second one for the GF, it will definitely be a Silver/Red.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

I doubt if the hubs are orange on the White/Orange 2.0 
That wine hub opposite the rims is eyecatching.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

You are correct, the White/Orange hubs are black.


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

plaindave said:


> Does anybody know if the rear hub is a new style cassette freehub or the old style screw on freewheel? The Quando website only shows one 170mm hub and it's a screw on style. I haven't seen that used in over 20 years. Not sure id want one.


I don't see the fatbike hubs on the Quando website. It looks like the 170 on the freewheel hub is describing the total axle length as a bolt-on. The frame width looks like it's 114mm. Didn't see a 135 front or 170 rear, website may be behind on product. Also, spec sheet says SRAM 9 spd, and I don' believe they make a 9spd freewheel.


----------



## Ophion13 (Jan 27, 2014)

*Minnesota 2.0 maiden voyage*

Picked up my new ride today. The silver/red looks sharp, it felt comfortable to ride, handle great. Here she is on her first ride in the Minnesota tundra
The 29'er wheelset will be arriving by middle of the week.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Ophion13 said:


> Picked up my new ride today. The silver/red looks sharp, it felt comfortable to ride, handle great. Here she is on her first ride in the Minnesota tundra
> The 29'er wheelset will be arriving by middle of the week.
> 
> View attachment 865226
> ...


Congrats on the bike Ophion13

That Silver/Red Combo is really starting to grow on me.


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Not sure if I missed it in a previous post, but since you have the bike now, can you confirm if the rear hub is a screw on freewheel or freehub w/cassette? Hoping to have mine by the weekend.


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

Awesome! Glad to start seeing these pop up. I called in requesting a status for shipping out of curiosity. The rep was extremely nice and told me I would likely have my bike by the 1st of February. I asked about the second set of wheel rumors, and he indicated they had arrived behind, but made it sound like the time crunch was building up the preorder bikes. I'm assuming they would ship out bikes in the order of preorders recieved. Mine was back in November, so I'm guessing I should be up soon. I'm pretending that it wont be here for another two weeks, just so I won't get excited.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

MTBLoCo29 said:


> Not sure if I missed it in a previous post, but since you have the bike now, can you confirm if the rear hub is a screw on freewheel or freehub w/cassette? Hoping to have mine by the weekend.


Here is a picture of the cassette that was posted on the Facebook group. It appears to have a lock ring on the cassette so it appears to be a regular freehub with cassette.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

It says SRAM 9 speed on the specs, I don't think I have ever seen a SRAM 9 speed freewheel, so I think it has to be a cassette. Mine should be built in the next day or 2, when I pick them up I'll confirm if no one else has already done so.


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Thanks, just saw that too. Definitely looks like a freehub/cassette .



Kawidan said:


> Here is a picture of the cassette that was posted on the Facebook group. It appears to have a lock ring on the cassette so it appears to be a regular freehub with cassette.
> View attachment 865266


----------



## rhowcow (Jan 27, 2014)

I ordered my 18" white/orange yesterday and they said it would be ready for PU by Friday. They are completely sold out of ALL 20" frame size. I'm 6'1" with a 32 inch inseam and the 18" felt just fine. I test drove the 20" and it didn't seem that different. I think the sales guy said they still have 156 of the 18" left. Can't wait to take it out. -17 and -35 windchill today in MN so i wouldn't ride anyway.


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Called customer service today. They're starting to ship this afternoon through Wed. My guess is that I won't have it by the time I go to the mountains this w-e, being in CA. The closer to MN, obviously, the faster you'll get it.

On a separate note, their CS reps are really cool.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Glad to report that the tires are Tubeless Ready. This is going to be one of my first mod.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

A nice Black one with Blue Surly Strips and Surly Nate tires.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

Trying to be patient, but couldn't resist calling the bike shop. FYI for locals waiting to pick theirs up... they are building them in order that people bought them. I put in my order on 12/26 and his rough guess was end of the week, but no later than mid next week. The demand for these bikes has been strong.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

Has anyone received an email saying their bike has been shipped? If yes, when did you place your order?

Patiently waiting....

Take care,

Mike


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

No email yet. I ordered on Jan 3rd. If I go to The House Website and click on Track Order on top of the page, my order still says as Processing which is what it's said since I ordered.


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> No email yet. I ordered on Jan 3rd. If I go to The House Website and click on Track Order on top of the page, my order still says as Processing which is what it's said since I ordered.


I ordered late of November/Early December and my order still says processing as well.


----------



## trout_smith (Jan 21, 2006)

Bought a 20" silver/red last Friday on eBay. Shipped today to arrive Wednesday.


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> No email yet. I ordered on Jan 3rd. If I go to The House Website and click on Track Order on top of the page, my order still says as Processing which is what it's said since I ordered.


Same here, I ordered on 1/3/14 @ 11:00 am. This morning it says processing. Customer service says they forwarded my order to the warehouse for shipping and I should get another email today with tracking information. I hope the email is correct.

Take care,

Mike


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

They temporarily credited my Visa yesterday... Which made me a little nervous. Today my account doesn't show activity, from them... So who's knows. I ordered 1/16 so I'm way back of the line!


----------



## rondean (Dec 6, 2013)

My track order page said to call for info. So, customer service said that a helmet that I bought was on back-order. She made it a separate order so it wouldn't delay bike shipment. She couldn't say when bike would ship, but I hope this will speed it up. Said they were now being inspected for quality control. Ordered mine 12-16-13.


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

ordered last week in november, order status still processing aka no movement. 
Yesterday i was told the extra wheelset was still at customs, and all orders wouldn't be shipped out till they were in. I asked to ship the bike separate since i dont need the extra wheelset till summer and I have the snow now for the fatty, but they would not budge.

if anyone has heard otherwise or has a better update that'd be great to hear.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Some people that don't care for the extra wheelsets are actually cancelling their orders and ordering it on Ebay at the cheaper price minus the extra wheels.

One guy ordered yesterday morning and his bike has already shipped with an expected delivery of tomorrow.

I'm almost tempted to do the same but I'm trying to be patient and wait it out. I keep telling myself that we are still 2 days away from the original ship date of Jan 30th and I knew that when I ordered it so that's the only thing keeping me from ordering it on Ebay LOL


----------



## WiscoHyz (Jan 8, 2014)

Ordered my 18" White from DJs Boardshop via Ebay on Sunday 1/26, shipped yesterday for tomorrow delivery. I did not see any value on waiting for the bike based on an extra set of wheels that will never see the light of day. Also, will put the $90 saved towards some components that I will actually get some return on. Looking forward to hitting the trail on Thursday!!


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Ordered mine a couple weeks ago or so. Called today and was told that it's shipping this afternoon (Tuesday 1/28) via Fedex ground.

Update: order has shipped. Won't be able to track it until Fedex updates its computers.


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

zorg said:


> Ordered mine a couple weeks ago or so. Called today and was told that it's shipping this afternoon (Tuesday 1/28) via Fedex ground.
> 
> Update: order has shipped. Won't be able to track it until Fedex updates its computers.


did you get a shipping email? seems odd that those of use that ordered back in november havent and your order placed a couple weeks ago did. Did you get teh slick or knobby 29er wheelset? I wonder if only one set are in?


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Knobby wheelset


----------



## FrdSHOx3 (Sep 10, 2009)

Kawidan said:


> Some people that don't care for the extra wheelsets are actually cancelling their orders and ordering it on Ebay at the cheaper price minus the extra wheels.
> 
> One guy ordered yesterday morning and his bike has already shipped with an expected delivery of tomorrow.
> 
> I'm almost tempted to do the same but I'm trying to be patient and wait it out. I keep telling myself that we are still 2 days away from the original ship date of Jan 30th and I knew that when I ordered it so that's the only thing keeping me from ordering it on Ebay LOL


I cancelled my order with the plan to get the Ebay one. There was a hold on the funds on my CC that took 3 days to clear, so keep that in mind. Might just be worth it to wait it out.

I totally defected anyways and picked up a 2014 Pugsley...


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

My 18' Silver/Red bike and wheels that I ordered on Christmas day has shipped!!! It will get here on the Mississippi Gulf Coast just in time for 60 degree weather to return! 

Galen


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

They just called me. Shipping this PM or tomorrow. Expected delivery in Denver Fri/Sat.

Sounds like this fresh snow we got last night will get test ridden Sunday before the Broncos win the Super Bowl!

Got the slicks, if it matters to anyone.


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

GalenCopes said:


> My 18' Silver/Red bike and wheels that I ordered on Christmas day has shipped!!! It will get here on the Mississippi Gulf Coast just in time for 60 degree weather to return!
> 
> Galen


did you order the slick or knobby 29ers wheelset?seems like the only shipping are the knobbies


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

hokiebrett said:


> They just called me. Shipping this PM or tomorrow. Expected delivery in Denver Fri/Sat.
> 
> Sounds like this fresh snow we got last night will get test ridden Sunday before the Broncos win the Super Bowl!
> 
> Got the slicks, if it matters to anyone.


When did you place your original order?


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

chrixtopher said:


> When did you place your original order?


...


hokiebrett said:


> I ordered 1/16 so I'm way back of the line!


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

hokiebrett said:


> ...


Man, you got the same order as me exactly and I ordered in november. Just called up and after being on hold 20 minutes they said it wont ship today. Not sure why it's not first come first serve?


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Yeah, sounds like I got bumped somehow.

And they called me!

Who knows. Looking forward to fat biking Sunday!! (Pre-marriage counseling seminar Saturday... Would it set a bad tone if I blew that off to go fat bikin'?)


----------



## Slow Danger (Oct 9, 2009)

Dear Minnesota bikes/Framed/House customer service reps,

Because you've had to spend the past week/weeks fielding calls from folks wondering why their bikes haven't shipped ahead of the original shipping date which hasn't arrived yet, even while updates are happening on Facebook and on mtbr, I give you permission to run outside and curse every single one of the callers. Then come back inside and be really nice to all the folks that keep calling, but make sure to put each caller on hold for 30 minutes before answering.


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

yes, and make sure to please ship out the order in reverse order also. whoever heard of FIFO anyhow?


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

HA. No joke. Sometimes too much information is a bad thing?

The poor CS girl sounded stressed. I offered to buy her a drink, but she didn't know how to charge my card for it


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

hokiebrett said:


> HA. No joke. Sometimes too much information is a bad thing?
> 
> The poor CS girl sounded stressed. I offered to buy her a drink, but she didn't know how to charge my card for it


I was thinking the same thing the other day. They should of just stuck to original Jan 30th ship instead of teasing us with the earlier ship date. It probably would of saved themselves a lot of calls.

But on the other hand, the chance of an earlier ship date gave me the push I needed to order one. I was thinking of waiting it out until the Boris X9 became available but when I found out that the Minnesota 2.0 may ship early, that was the push I needed to place my order. Now that I know that the Boris X9 won't be available until mid-March, I'm even more happy I went with the Minnesota. Now I just got to get my hands on it LOL


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

They were losing a lot of orders to folks canceling and buying on ebay. they had to keep stoking the fire. its all about supply and demand, and marketing rules in that game


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

They were not loosing any orders because they were the ones on E bay. They were selling the bikes without the wheel set for less $$. I searched their account and name was different but same location.


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

Yetiski said:


> They were not loosing any orders because they were the ones on E bay. They were selling the bikes without the wheel set for less $$. I searched their account and name was different but same location.


I meant people flipping to another fatbike. IE: not ordering another framed bike.


----------



## Slow Danger (Oct 9, 2009)

chrixtopher said:


> I meant people flipping to another fatbike. IE: not ordering another framed bike.


So people were cancelling because the bikes they ordered were still set to ship out by the original shipping date? That's strange. Somebody should call customer service and ask.


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

They are the ones who caused all this crap by moving the ship date up and then moving it again and again. They called back on Sat and said the bike would ship on mon and be delivered to WI on tue. Now it turns out they never shipped it at all. If you want to say that it still is not the original ship date you are correct, but they are the ones who leaked the 17th, 20th, 24th, and the last one 27th which did not come true.


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

Slow Danger said:


> So people were cancelling because the bikes they ordered were still set to ship out by the original shipping date? That's strange. Somebody should call customer service and ask.


You could read this thread and see for yourself how others were going to, or we could all give each other nuggies and be inter web tough guys and not contribute anything useful to the thread?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Back on track. The famous wheelset LOL :thumbsup:


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

As I work in customer service, I really do feel for the people who are working the phones on this order. Yes, I know they are shipping early...but if they would have consistently put factual information on their Facebook page it would have kept down the phone calls. I never saw them list when the bikes actually came in or when the wheels came in. Maybe some teaser pics of the order arriving. Letting us know about the delay in shipping due to wheels not coming in would have saved them a bunch of calls. Don't sugar coat the situation...just tell us what is going on.

Galen


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

I think I am the only one who actually wants the extra wheelset. I may even pick up an extra set when everyone starts selling off the ones they don't want! Part of the reason I purchased this bike is for commuting to work with an inexpensive bike and the 29er wheels will come in handy!

Galen


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

GalenCopes said:


> I think I am the only one who actually wants the extra wheelset. I may even pick up an extra set when everyone starts selling off the ones they don't want! Part of the reason I purchased this bike is for commuting to work with an inexpensive bike and the 29er wheels will come in handy!
> 
> Galen


I ordered the slick wheelset with the idea of turning the bike into a rigid 29er commuter in the summer time. Not sure if I'll actually convert it but having that option is nice.


----------



## Slow Danger (Oct 9, 2009)

;


chrixtopher said:


> You could read this thread and see for yourself how others were going to, or we could all give each other nuggies and be inter web tough guys and not contribute anything useful to the thread?


I been reading this thread since post #15. Man, some of you guys are wound pretty tight. Hope you get your bikes soon. Imagine what will happen to some of you if the bikes are a couple months late like the Specialized bikes. Oh, wait, you can order the same bike from the same company on Ebay right now, and it will even ship before Jan. 30th. Just trying to have some fun around here. No hard feelings intended.


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Got my confirmation from Fedex. It's supposed to arrive Saturday in Norcal. Too bad, I'll be in the mountains this w-e. Time to check with Fedex to see if I can reroute the package.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

I picked up my bikes today. The demand had them call the factory in Asia, and ask them to build over 3 times more than they expected. They got orders for more than they expected to sell all season in less than a week, so the factory was asked to build a much larger run. So I imagine that is the cause of the chaos some are experiencing. The spare wheels will come, I trust that they will, and the guys have been great to deal with. To be fair, I don't see that the House ever did anything but said they would ship on the 30th, it was Framed that was posting on their page. I asked the guys in the shop a couple of times about the timeline that Framed had posted, and they hadn't heard those things. 

All I can say is I got the bikes and am pleased with how they came out. They did a good job on it, and even if it had been late, it wouldn't matter once I saw it!!! I know it is hard to be patient when you have a new bike coming, but understand that once it comes, you won't think again about it once you see it!!


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

Has anyone else wondered why it's called the Minnesota when it's clearly made in Asia?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Framed Bikes is based out of Minnesota and the Framed Bikes Logo on the bike is an outline of the State of Minnesota.


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

That is good to hear Snopro440!

I received an email from the House saying my bike has been shipped. I checked the House site and the bike shows shipped, but not the 29' rims with trail tires. I actually want them too, but anticipate riding fat 99% of the time. FedEx confirmation email says shipped today and expected delivery in Miami, Florida on Friday. I doubt it will make it to me before the weekend. Most of my shipments seem to get close to me and then sit for a day. It happens a lot and is really frustrating. 

Those of you who have received theirs, please keep your mini reviews coming. Thank you!

Take care,

Mike


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

They told me that Customs goofed on the wheels, and they were separated from the bikes. They are going to be arriving within a week I am guessing. They told me they would call me when they are in, and I can go and get them. I am thinking that they will ship the bikes without the second set of wheels, and when the wheels come in they will be sent separately. I don't KNOW that, but based on what they told me, that is what makes sense.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Received notice yesterday from both The House and Fedex that mine is in route to my home with 4 inches of fresh powder waiting.


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

Truitnow said:


> Received notice yesterday from both The House and Fedex that mine is in route to my home with 4 inches of fresh powder waiting.


if you guys post shipping notice, it's nice to know the bike color/size and more importantly the extra wheelset choice - trail or skinny. also order date is nice to know as well.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

chrixtopher said:


> if you guys post shipping notice, it's nice to know the bike color/size and more importantly the extra wheelset choice - trail or skinny. also order date is nice to know as well.


Dec. 5 - Minnesota 2.0 White/Orange 18in
Slims slick 29in wheel set.

Anything else?


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

did the wheelset actually ship with the bike as well?
thanks


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

chrixtopher said:


> did the wheelset actually ship with the bike as well?
> thanks


Yes it States on the invoice that the wheelset was shipped as well.


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

Truitnow said:


> Yes it States on the invoice that the wheelset was shipped as well.


Thanks, that makes you one of the first orders with slick wheelset to get shipped. amazingly yesterday to boot. enjoy your bike!


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

This was posted on the Facebook Group. 
Unboxing and Assembly for those wondering what comes inside and what needs to be assembled. From the look of it, you need to install the front wheel, bars and pedals.

Here is his first impressions. Thanks to Chris for the pics.

Initial impressions: built like a tank, but not excessively heavy. Flat black finish is freaking awesome. Welds, while not bad, are not beautiful- but I expected that at this price point. Cassette looks low end, will have to see how that holds up, again - no surprise. TruVativ crankset looks adequate, cosmetically cool, should be easy to service if needed. Saddle- we will see, might be upgrading, ...no surprise. Cables good, love the white housing. Tires and wheels are sexy as hell, will report back on their performance on Fargo snow/ice. Love the Avid mech's, will be adjusting those and setting the pads this afternoon. SRAM system is new to me, will report back, but initial gearing adjustments seem to be close to "on", will have some cable stretch, no doubt.
















__
Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18
Show Content


----------



## Slow Danger (Oct 9, 2009)

Kawidan, do you work for the House? If not, they should pay you. You've been doing a great job keeping this thread up to date.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Slow Danger said:


> Kawidan, do you work for the House? If not, they should pay you. You've been doing a great job keeping this thread up to date.


I wish I worked for The House, maybe I'd have my bike by now LOL

But seriously, I'm just a customer up here in Canada patiently waiting for his new Minnesota 2.0 to ship.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Also for those who may have missed it and are on Facebook, come on over and check out the Framed Minnesota Fatbike owner's Group. Lots of good information is being posted about the bike. I try and take as much of the info and posted on here to keep those who aren't on the group updated.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/691226087566074/


----------



## FrdSHOx3 (Sep 10, 2009)

Slow Danger said:


> Kawidan, do you work for the House? If not, they should pay you. You've been doing a great job keeping this thread up to date.


Exactly! I'm waiting to see his feedback when he gets his, LOL. (now we jinxed him and it will take forever...)

My friend ordered one after I ordered mine and she should get hers soon and we will compare the Pugs and Minnesota. See if I regret the Pugs.

The black and white looks so good!


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

FrdSHOx3 said:


> Exactly! I'm waiting to see his feedback when he gets his, LOL. (now we jinxed him and it will take forever...)
> 
> My friend ordered one after I ordered mine and she should get hers soon and we will compare the Pugs and Minnesota. See if I regret the Pugs.
> 
> The black and white looks so good!


It better ship soon, the longer it takes to ship, the more parts I end buying for a bike that I don't even have yet.

I've got some nice mods planned for it, so really looking forward to getting my hands on it


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

chrixtopher said:


> did you get a shipping email? seems odd that those of use that ordered back in november havent and your order placed a couple weeks ago did. Did you get teh slick or knobby 29er wheelset? I wonder if only one set are in?


I got my shipping email yesterday, set to be delivered friday assuming the South snow is gone. knobby wheel set and ordered last day of November


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

GalenCopes said:


> I think I am the only one who actually wants the extra wheelset. I may even pick up an extra set when everyone starts selling off the ones they don't want! Part of the reason I purchased this bike is for commuting to work with an inexpensive bike and the 29er wheels will come in handy!
> 
> Galen


I got the knobbys, but I want a slick set when people start selling them.


----------



## WiscoHyz (Jan 8, 2014)

She was just delivered today. Pleasantly surprised with the quality. Nice work Framed. Looking forward to the trail tomorrow!!


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

Anybody with their bike want to make a quick youtube video? I noticed that there are none with this bike.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Looks like another happy owner. Man that Silver/Red is looking better and better the more I see it but I'm going to stick with my White/Orange.

Picked up my bike and immediately went to Lebanon Hills for a ride over lunch. Wow, what a great bike! All of you are going to enjoy getting yours out for a spin.

Couple initial impressions... I'm glad I had them mount up a Surly Nate on the back as you really sit more forward on this bike and when the snow was loose I appreciated every inch of traction. The Vee Mission up front was adequate at 6psi. This bike rewards aggressive riding, so get some speed an lean into the turn!

The 2X9 components are solid, but I'm going to swap out the front chain rings as I have a 22/32 sitting in my parts bin. Just felt like I wanted a little lower gearing up some of the hills.

Thanks to Mark at the Framed bike shop, really nice guy and has a ton of knowledge about bikes.


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

WiscoHyz said:


> She was just delivered today. Pleasantly surprised with the quality. Nice work Framed. Looking forward to the trail tomorrow!!


The bike looks great!
Are the rims ano or paint?


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

GalenCopes said:


> I think I am the only one who actually wants the extra wheelset. I may even pick up an extra set when everyone starts selling off the ones they don't want! Part of the reason I purchased this bike is for commuting to work with an inexpensive bike and the 29er wheels will come in handy!
> 
> Galen


X2

That's what sold me. I want a bike path/commuter bike to ride while exercising the dog and to take on the paved bike paths that are all around my town. But I didn't want a road bike because I don't like being that slumped over nor do I trust road wheels (I'm a curb hopper).

According the The House's website, my order is still processing. Yesterday she called me to verify the address and said it would ship last night or today. Maybe it'll update in the AM.


----------



## WiscoHyz (Jan 8, 2014)

Rowdy Sluggins said:


> The bike looks great!
> Are the rims ano or paint?


No ano here, just good ole fashioned paint. Looks to pretty durable, but only time will tell...


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I believe only the Silver/Red has anodized rims. All the other are painted.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

WiscoHyz said:


> No ano here, just good ole fashioned paint. Looks to pretty durable, but only time will tell...


The hubs and rims on the Silver/Red are definitely anodized. But the other colors (black/Orange/White) are painted.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

mncyclist said:


> The hubs and rims on the Silver/Red are definitely anodized. But the other colors (black/Orange/White) are painted.


Well. Crap. I would've ordered silver/red.


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

I ordered Nov 26, I read all this and wait for the call...


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

From what I was told last night by someone who spoke to Customer Support @ The House last night, they hope to have ALL orders shipped out today. They are getting all the orders setup and they started shipping some on Tuesday but they hope to have them all out of the warehouse by today.

So let's hope they come through.


----------



## chrixtopher (May 14, 2012)

i havent heard of any orders shipping yesterday (wed) or today (thurs) yet. Only order shipped out that people have posted about were Monday and Tuesday.


----------



## imflynt (Jan 23, 2014)

Talked to my rep at the HOuse last night they called to verify payment, said bike will ship today extra wheelset will ship when they come in possible in the next week.

I ordered silver/red, I asked if the red rims were anodized which they are but I thought he said the black are too.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Just a bit of interesting info.

Tom Puzak who finished 2nd in the Arrowhead 135 Race earlier this week is the one who wrote the Minnesota 2.0 Review for Gearjunkie.

First Look: $899 'Minnesota' Fat Bike | Gear Review | Gear Junkie


----------



## LosPollos (Jan 23, 2014)

Kawidan said:


> Just a bit of interesting info.
> 
> Tom Puzak who finished 2nd in the Arrowhead 135 Race earlier this week is the one who wrote the Minnesota 2.0 Review for Gearjunkie.
> 
> First Look: $899 'Minnesota' Fat Bike | Gear Review | Gear Junkie


If only he would have came in 2nd riding a Minnesota 2.0


----------



## finboy (Jan 22, 2014)

Any one know if this is considered American made? Playing with a shipping calculator to see if duties apply on it.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

Asia for sure


----------



## finboy (Jan 22, 2014)

With shipping costs, it is looking 1-200 cheaper than the norco Bigfoot, out dollar needs to get some strength back


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

finboy said:


> Any one know if this is considered American made? Playing with a shipping calculator to see if duties apply on it.


Negative, they are made overseas.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

A whole bunch of people on the Facebook Group have gotten their shipping confirmation this afternoon, but they all seem to be people who ordered Silver/Red. Those must be at the front of the warehouse and they are shipping them first. One guy ordered on Jan 23rd and his bike shipped today.

The white and orange must be way at the back of the warehouse


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

finboy said:


> With shipping costs, it is looking 1-200 cheaper than the norco Bigfoot, out dollar needs to get some strength back


Funny you say that finboy,

I'm in Canada also and one of the local dealer in my city is selling Bigfoot's at almost the same price as the Minnesota once you factor in the CDN conversion and tax and duty that you will pay once you bring it over. I was almost tempted to pick one up but I'm going to wait it out and wait for my Minnesota to arrive.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

Swapped in 22/32t rings in the front last night. As luck would have we got a nice dump of snow this morning so I got in a ride over lunch to test it out. The lower gearing made a big difference pushing through the snow and going up hills.


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

Finally, Got the Framed and put it together and I am very impressed for a bike in this price range. Just a hair under 34# and everything functioned great. This was a friends bike he was shipping to my shop for assembly and to avoid state tax. He is pleased and so am I now that I have another person to fat bike with.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I just got my confirmation email for a Tuesday delivery.

Thanks for choosing The-House.com.

We thought you'd like to know that we shipped the order you placed on Friday January 03rd of 2014. Your order is on its way, and can no longer be changed. If you have any questions, please contact our customer service at 800-992-7245 or by email at [email protected].

Item(s) Shipped
FRAMED MINNESOTA 2.0 MEN'S FAT BIKE WHITE/ORANGE 18in 1
FRAMED FATTIE SLIMS SLICK BIKE WHEELSET 29in 1


----------



## Roaming50 (Apr 30, 2009)

hokiebrett said:


> They just called me. Shipping this PM or tomorrow. Expected delivery in Denver Fri/Sat.


Just in time for the predicted foot of snow to be dumped on the front ranch tonight !


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

TheNormsk said:


> Just in time for the predicted foot of snow to be dumped on the front ranch tonight !


Don't know about the front ranch, but the high country and the front Range is getting hit! I'm currently playing hooky at Vail. My fiancé is here for a conference and I'm getting turns in the AM.



Kawidan said:


> The white and orange must be way at the back of the warehouse


My white/orange shipped! FedEx says Saturday delivery! Sat night build up, fat bikin' Sunday before the Broncos bring home the Lombardi bacon!!


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

I got a notification from The House and FedEx that my White/Orange 2.0 with Slick 29r's shipped today. Two packages, that I hope will arrive soon. I know a lot of folks have acted bent out of shape about the wait time, but when I ordered, the predicted ship time was 1/30/2014. They shipped on 1/30/2014. Nothing to complain about there. We've got fresh snow here in Utah, so I'm hoping FedEx doesn't take too long.


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Box is current in North Salt Lake. Another 800 miles and it'll be in the bay area. Still showing delivery on Saturday. Plan is to switch rings for 22/32 and maybe the rear derailleur and shifters (got some 9spd X.9 laying around).


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Fedex just arrived with a? big box with something big and fat inside. What could it be? Smile..


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Truitnow said:


> Fedex just arrived with a? big box with something big and fat inside. What could it be? Smile..


Truitnow, did your slick wheelset also come in? If they did, post up some pics when you get it assembled. Haven't seen a 2.0 with a slick wheelset as of yet.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

No. There's a note that the wheels are held up in customs and will be released in 10 days. They will send an email when shipped.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Truitnow said:


> No. There's a note that the wheels are held up in customs and will be released in 10 days. They will send an email when shipped.


Gotcha, look forward to hearing your comments on it. My 18" White/Orange and the Slick Wheelset have both shipped.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

A Silver/Red and a White/Orange together at The House Boardshop getting ready to go out for a ride. I hope to have one of each color in the very near future


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Very nice.


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

FedEx dude showed up at my door with my Silver/White Minnesota 2.0...without the extra wheelset. I got it put together, put on some shorts and went for a quick ride. On the road with 15lbs in the tires, I really didn't notice any self-steer. It was definitely more work to ride than my road bike, but it is made for a different purpose...which is why I purchased it in the first place. My only complaint is I am 5'10" and I wish I would have gone with the 16" instead of the 18" I got. The top tube is really getting close to encroaching in sensitive areas!

Galen


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

GalenCopes said:


> FedEx dude showed up at my door with my Silver/White Minnesota 2.0...without the extra wheelset. I got it put together, put on some shorts and went for a quick ride. On the road with 15lbs in the tires, I really didn't notice any self-steer. It was definitely more work to ride than my road bike, but it is made for a different purpose...which is why I purchased it in the first place. My only complaint is I am 5'10" and I wish I would have gone with the 16" instead of the 18" I got. The top tube is really getting close to encroaching in sensitive areas!
> 
> Galen


What's your inseam GalenCopes? I'm 5'11 with a 31/32" in-seam and I was debating between the 18" and 20" and decided to go for the 18".

If the stand-over is that high, I'll definitely have to order a 16" for the GF. I was hoping she'd fit on an 18" so that I could order another 18" in Silver/Red but it looks like it will have to be a 16".

I didn't want to order the second one until I get the 18" and let her try it on for size.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Truitnow said:


> Very nice.


Very nice. Those bright orange rims on that white snow sure look nice. Congrats.

Make sure to reposition that front skewer. It could easily get knocked opened in that position


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

I'm 5'10" and have the 18". I love the way the bike feels. The key for me is that once you hop on you don't want to get off. Just trying to understand the gearing.....


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

Kawidan,

My inseam is probably closer to 30. I wear a 32 inseam in pants...but that really doesn't mean anything. I did have to sink the seat post pretty much all the way down to get the fit close. 

Maybe I am just getting shorter as I am getting older and these are old measurements!

Galen


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

Has anyone had slow updates on the FedEx tracking? Mine shipped on 1/28 and is still showing a delivery on 1/31 (today). The last location on the FedEx tracking is "in transit - Nashville" on 1/29 (I am in Miami, Florida). I was really hoping for my 20" Orange and White 2.0 before the weekend. :-( 

Impatiently waiting (now)....

Mike


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

MPE said:


> Has anyone had slow updates on the FedEx tracking? Mine shipped on 1/28 and is still showing a delivery on 1/31 (today). The last location on the FedEx tracking is "in transit - Nashville" on 1/29 (I am in Miami, Florida). I was really hoping for my 20" Orange and White 2.0 before the weekend. :-(
> 
> Impatiently waiting (now)....
> 
> Mike


Mike, does your last location show when the next update will be. Hopefully your next update is the delivery.

When I check my FedEx tracking, mine only shipped out last night but when I look at the last update, it states when the next scheduled tracking update will be.

1/31/2014 - Friday

10:29 am 
Departed FedEx location

SAINT PAUL, MN

Next scheduled tracking update: Feb 01, 2014

Keep us updated. Hopefully it gets delivered today. The good thing is that I believe FedEx also delivers on Saturdays


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Patience Mike. Its coming


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

Kawidan,

Mine does not have the "next scheduled tracking date" on it. Unfortunately, I had it sent to my workplace and I think the drivers know we are closed on Saturday. I might come it and hang out for a bit on Saturday if I get an update. I still have 3 hours today!

Thanks,

Mike


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

COME ON FEDEX!!!! Mike needs his Fat Bike LOL


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> A whole bunch of people on the Facebook Group have gotten their shipping confirmation this afternoon, but they all seem to be people who ordered Silver/Red. Those must be at the front of the warehouse and they are shipping them first. One guy ordered on Jan 23rd and his bike shipped today.
> 
> The white and orange must be way at the back of the warehouse


According to Fedex, my 20" Orange and White was delivered a few minutes ago..waiting on a conference call to finish before going home to pick it up.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Truitnow said:


> Very nice.


My Son said "Screw the Boris...I'll take this"
Me "It's not your size"
Son "l can work with it"


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

I'm still waiting for my order for a 20" White/Orange to be shipped....watching this is painful, so many people will be having a fat weekend, Do I call about it?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Truitnow said:


> My Son said "Screw the Boris...I'll take this"
> Me "It's not your size"
> Son "l can work with it"


If I remember correctly, you had ordered a 18" Minnesota for you and a Large Boris for your son.

That means that he would need a 20" Minnesota 2.0 and they are all sold out. So it's not as simple as cancelling the Boris and ordering another 18" Minnesota.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

2LO4U2C said:


> I'm still waiting for my order for a 20" White/Orange to be shipped....watching this is painful, so many people will be having a fat weekend, Do I call about it?


I would call just to be sure they aren't waiting for you to confirm something. I haven't heard of anybody getting a shipping confirmation so I figured everyone got theirs. Even if it's end of business day, don't give out hope that you won't get your shipping confirmation tonight. I got mine at like 8pm Eastern time last night.


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> COME ON FEDEX!!!! Mike needs his Fat Bike LOL


Ok, FedEx just updated my tracking and I will not have a fat weekend :-( My order made it to Orlando and says it will be delivered Monday 2/3/2014. I guess I can leave work now! Also, my wife will now get me to do a few things around the house this weekend.

For those of you who received their bikes, please keep the reviews coming. I need to live vicariously for a few more days.

Thanks and take care,

Mike


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

MPE said:


> Ok, FedEx just updated my tracking and I will not have a fat weekend :-( My order made it to Orlando and says it will be delivered Monday 2/3/2014. I guess I can leave work now! Also, my wife will now get me to do a few things around the house this weekend.
> 
> For those of you who received their bikes, please keep the reviews coming. I need to live vicariously for a few more days.
> 
> ...


Mike if you are on Facebook, go check out the Minnesota Fat Bike owner's Group. Lots of discussions, reviews and such. Hopefully it can hold you over until Monday LOL

https://www.facebook.com/groups/691226087566074/members/


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Due in the SF bay area 2/1...

- 1/31/2014 - Friday
8:30 am	
Departed FedEx location
NORTH SALT LAKE, UT
- 1/30/2014 - Thursday
8:27 pm	
Arrived at FedEx location
NORTH SALT LAKE, UT
- 1/29/2014 - Wednesday
12:19 pm	
In transit
MINNEAPOLIS, MN
11:17 am	
Departed FedEx location
SAINT PAUL, MN
- 1/28/2014 - Tuesday
11:44 pm	
Arrived at FedEx location
SAINT PAUL, MN
8:34 pm	
Picked up
SAINT PAUL, MN
12:23 pm	
Shipment information sent to FedEx


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> Mike if you are on Facebook, go check out the Minnesota Fat Bike owner's Group. Lots of discussions, reviews and such. Hopefully it can hold you over until Monday LOL
> 
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/691226087566074/members/


Thanks for the heads up, but I am not on Facebook (I would get lost and never leave). I can always pirate my wife's account and take a look!

Mike


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Kawidan. That's correct. I couldn't nor wouldn't try to change the order again. That Boris is his when he gets back from College.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Let the customization begin. One owner on the Facebook group got his and her's matching bike and made each bike their own.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Another pic of the custom Black/Red


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

They look good! Before I ordered, I asked The House if I could order a silver frame with orange wheels. They said no. Just a thought, if anyone wants to trade frames, maybe we should talk. Monday I will have a 20" white frame and would like a 20" silver frame (maybe, I might love the white frame).

Thanks,

Mike


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

First pictures of the Slick Wheelset


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Looks good Kawidan. I was asked by 4 people today "What kind of bike I had"?


----------



## LosPollos (Jan 23, 2014)

GalenCopes said:


> FedEx dude showed up at my door with my Silver/White Minnesota 2.0...without the extra wheelset. I got it put together, put on some shorts and went for a quick ride. On the road with 15lbs in the tires, I really didn't notice any self-steer. It was definitely more work to ride than my road bike, but it is made for a different purpose...which is why I purchased it in the first place. My only complaint is I am 5'10" and I wish I would have gone with the 16" instead of the 18" I got. The top tube is really getting close to encroaching in sensitive areas!
> 
> Galen


How was the top tube length at your height? I'm curious what people are thinking about the shorter top tube length.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> If I remember correctly, you had ordered a 18" Minnesota for you and a Large Boris for your son.
> 
> That means that he would need a 20" Minnesota 2.0 and they are all sold out. So it's not as simple as cancelling the Boris and ordering another 18" Minnesota.


@ Truitnow or anyone who knows...is there a published or unpublished weight for the Boris X9?


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

Someone had posted it on one of the forums and it was in the ball park of the Framed at 33-35#. I am glad all these new bikes are using standard MTN bike parts to make upgrades easy. We are already looking at using some of my Beargrease take off parts on the Framed. I was a little bummed that they used an Isis style bottom bracket instead of a standard threaded one so now a GXP will have to be purchased to use the X9 crank.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Mncyclist the review I read was on the KHS 4 Seasons 3000 which is the same as the Motor Boris X9. As I recall the weight was around 35lbs. Someone correct me if I'm mistaken. I think it was in the Moto Direct thread. The Minnesota 2.0 is really a nice bike for the $$$$$$.


----------



## Bumpyride (Jan 2, 2014)

Todd J December 28, 2013 at 10:04 am # 
We weighed the 17″ KHS 3000 in the shop last week. It came in at 33lbs., 1oz.

REPLY
G Greene January 30, 2014 at 3:43 pm # 

Another weight I saw was 33# 11 oz.


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

What's a good tube to buy? Shrader or Presta?


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

I'm pissed. 

FedEx didn't deliver my fat bike today. They're closed Sunday's. 5-6" of fresh freaking snow (still lightly snowing) and I have a fat bike at FedEx's warehouse 3 miles from my house.

They left a note saying "sorry we missed you, please call this 1-800 Number on Monday"


----------



## Bumpyride (Jan 2, 2014)

zorg said:


> What's a good tube to buy? Shrader or Presta?


I bought a Schwalbe AV 13f Shrader only because Espen W said so.

Standard Vee Rubber 4.0 tubes usually come in at 420-480g, while the Schwalbe 13F (rated to 3.0) weigh on average 190g, so you can shed up to 600g on the bike with these. We have been testing them for tons of miles and hours on our new 103mm rims with Vee Mission, and they work great. Some folks have reported 13F occasionally rupturing, but we have zero failures so far.
The 295g Maxxis Freeride 2.2-2.5 works great as well.
R&D Manager
Diamant & Nakamura bikes
Our fatbike videos: Planet Fatbike - YouTube

It's really light and not cheap.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

Anyone else think it is time for a new tread / post for the Minnesota 1.0 / 2.0? Along the lines of a "Show me your..."? Seems like this current thread is full of mostly speculation and 5 pages of talking about shipping / arrivals. I think this was done for the Spesh fat boy.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Fatty Setup








Slick Setup


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

mn_biker said:


> Anyone else think it is time for a new tread / post for the Minnesota 1.0 / 2.0? Along the lines of a "Show me your..."? Seems like this current thread is full of mostly speculation and 5 pages of talking about shipping / arrivals. I think this was done for the Spesh fat boy.
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk[/QUOTE.
> I think this thread has naturally made a progression towards showing photos... upgrades .... suggestions...ideas...ect. As more bikes arrive to those waiting the thread will further evolve. The FB group members are sharing here as well.


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

No. This thread will evolve because it is not specific to new sales. Don't start another thread. The top posts will define the discussion about "The Minnesota 1.0 and 2.0 Fatbikes"


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Man that looks like fun.



Kawidan said:


> Fatty Setup
> View attachment 866777
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

LosPollos said:


> How was the top tube length at your height? I'm curious what people are thinking about the shorter top tube length.


I really don't have much foundation to make a determination. I am comfortable riding the bike, but this is my only non-road bike.

Galen


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

Surly Bud fits the front with no problems! Initial review is that it was a very worthwhile upgrade. I found riding the Vee Mission in deeper snow to be way too frustrating no matter how much I lowered the pressure.

I'm now running a Nate on the back and Bud up front.










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

mn_biker said:


> View attachment 866843
> 
> 
> Surly Bud fits the front with no problems! Initial review is that it was a very worthwhile upgrade. I found riding the Vee Mission in deeper snow to be way too frustrating no matter how much I lowered the pressure.
> ...


Damn that looks good. Total cost of tires? Did you go tubeless?


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

Truitnow said:


> Damn that looks good. Total cost of tires? Did you go tubeless?


$135 for the Nate and $136 for the Bud. Bought the Nate first a few weeks ago online and picked up the Bud at my LBS using a 20% off coupon. Still expensive, but one of the reasons I bought this bike instead of a Farley or Pug was to save some money to do upgrades.

Have not gone tubeless on this setup and probably won't. However, I will run the stock Vee Missions tubeless this summer.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

That's a big 10-Fo Mn-biker. Very nice


----------



## USUK (Feb 2, 2014)

mn_biker said:


> View attachment 866211
> 
> 
> Swapped in 22/32t rings in the front last night. As luck would have we got a nice dump of snow this morning so I got in a ride over lunch to test it out. The lower gearing made a big difference pushing through the snow and going up hills.


Thinking of the same upgrade. Is this a 104/64 BCD setup, and did you use SRAM rings or aftermarket? (Bike hasn't been delivered yet!)

Thx


----------



## LosPollos (Jan 23, 2014)

Check out the ad in this month's Bicycling Magazine.

Note the price.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

No 2nd wheel set.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

No second wheelset and it probably doesn't include shipping. At $799 plus $40 shipping that we paid it's $839 which is $10 cheaper than what they are selling at on Ebay without the extra wheelset and free shipping.


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

So, let me get this right...I paid for my bike over a month before they could deliver, for which I got a "free" set of wheels, and now they drop the price by a smooth hundo not even a week after they even shipped my bike? While I a happy that others will be able to get a great bike at a great price, I feel like I didn't even get a courtesy reach around!

Galen


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

Truitnow said:


> No 2nd wheel set.


This. When I went into the Framed bike shop they were very upfront that I could purchase the 2.0 for $100 less if I skipped the 29er wheel set. I figured the extra wheel set would be fun and took them up on the promotion.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

USUK said:


> Thinking of the same upgrade. Is this a 104/64 BCD setup, and did you use SRAM rings or aftermarket? (Bike hasn't been delivered yet!)
> 
> Thx


I had these rings sitting in my parts bin. They are standard SRAM 3X10 rings pulled them off of a 2011 Trek Fuel EX 7. Standard 104/64 BCD setup. Very worthwhile swap of parts in my opinion for how I ride. The stock gearing on the Minnesota 2.0 was way too high on both rings.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

GalenCopes said:


> So, let me get this right...I paid for my bike over a month before they could deliver, for which I got a "free" set of wheels, and now they drop the price by a smooth hundo not even a week after they even shipped my bike? While I a happy that others will be able to get a great bike at a great price, I feel like I didn't even get a courtesy reach around!
> 
> Galen


GalenCopes, the new price doesn't include the extra wheelset. That promotion was only available until Feb 5th for those who pre-ordered.

If you go to the The House Website, the price is still $899 and you can can still get the free wheelset. After Feb 5th they will probably lower the price down to $799 and either no offer the extra wheelset or offer it at an additional cost.


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

Just thought I would post a pic of my winter riding. Even though was 64 degrees, it was windy as heck and a little on the nippy side! Heck, I even put on a light jacket for the ride! Sorry for the pic...my G2 doesn't have a great camera...but it handles drops way better than my IPhone 4 ever thought about!


The sand was really on the hard-packed side since we have been having damp weather, so I just left the tires at 15 psi. I only rode about 5 miles and most was on a multi-use trail. I just jumped in the sand for some fun and to pass people when I could.

I can already tell that a good set of fenders are going to be ordered. I am waiting to hear back from Big Os about which set to go with.

Galen


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> GalenCopes, the new price doesn't include the extra wheelset. That promotion was only available until Feb 5th for those who pre-ordered.
> 
> If you go to the The House Website, the price is still $899 and you can can still get the free wheelset. After Feb 5th they will probably lower the price down to $799 and either no offer the extra wheelset or offer it at an additional cost.


Once again...doesn't make the wheelset very "free" does it? I am cool with you selling me something. I actually would have paid extra and gotten the rims because I see value in both the parts and the expanded use of the bike...but I am not cool with being lied to, which I feel they did.

Galen


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Galen. I really don't see how you got screwed. But hey...That's the way you feel. I'm pleased with what I received and the choice that I was given. I also understood that there was a chance that the bikes could go up or down in price. Who knows that the House won't offer th 2.0 with a better group set than the one we received. Maybe at even a cheaper price. That would be crazy ......but hey? Stuff happens
If you think the House deal was a bad one I hope you voiced your views to them.


----------



## LosPollos (Jan 23, 2014)

Truitnow said:


> Galen. I really don't see how you got screwed. But hey...That's the way you feel. I'm pleased with what I received and the choice that I was given. I also understood that there was a chance that the bikes could go up or down in price. Who knows that the House won't offer th 2.0 with a better group set than the one we received. Maybe at even a cheaper price. That would be crazy ......but hey? Stuff happens
> If you think the House deal was a bad one I hope you voiced your views to them.


Customers will ultimately feel burned if they get their bikes, thinking they got something for free, only to see the bike marked down $100 cheaper a week later. A $100 lower cost on the release date is going to raise some eyebrows. This would definitely apply to anyone that ordered and didn't really need the extra wheelset.

It's a great bike at either price point. However, the way The-House handled the extra wheelset and the constant floating of the release date was kinda shady. They should have given us the choice. Do you want to save that $100, or get an extra wheelset, or use that $100 to upgrade from the 1.0 to 2.0. Instead the only option they gave you was to buy the wheel set for $100.

No one knows what will happen with the pricing but it's good speculation. If you want the extra wheelset for $100 you should order now from their website. If you want to save $100, wait until 2/5 or buy from them through eBay.


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

The extra wheelset was definitely an incentive, and I think you would be hard pressed to find an extra wheelset, tires, tubes, and cassette, with hubs that fit your fat bike for anything close to $100. (maybe $200?).


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

WAAAHOOOO!, a big box from Framed just arrived at work. Of course I am all jammed up for the rest of the day and can't get it built. I might have to peek inside.

Mike


----------



## augman440 (Jan 2, 2012)

I received my 18in red and silver 2.0 on Saturday, and got it put together last night. It went together very nice, with the only exception being  I think the factory had a gorrilla installing the controls and grips on the bars! They must have been using power tools to install them, as the fasteners were kind of buggered up and excessively torqued. I managed to get the handlebars and grips swapped out without damaging anything further, but it took a lot of patience and care to not strip them out. For a while I thought I'd be drilling out some of the fasteners. Other than that, all is good, the derailleurs and brakes were surprising well adjusted right out of the box. The cockpit is definitely a bit smaller than i'm used to with my XC style bikes, but i'm very happy with how it feels so far. I swapped out the handlebars with Easton mid rise monkey bars and like the way it fits. Time to get it out for a real ride and see what it can do!


----------



## crankdriven (Dec 12, 2013)

Rowdy Sluggins said:


> The extra wheelset was definitely an incentive, and I think you would be hard pressed to find an extra wheelset, tires, tubes, and cassette, with hubs that fit your fat bike for anything close to $100. (maybe $200?).


...and disc rotors..


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Turns out that Fedex ground delivers Tuesday-Saturday. One more day...


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Just did the Bud & Nate tire upgrade. What a difference in ride. Thanks Fern & Derrick at Cycle Haven NY.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

Seems like every new bike with a 170MM frame goes through speculation about will a 4.8" tire fit on the back??? You can see above the answer is no, not a chance. Mounted up my Bud to test it out and I could barely get the tire to jam in far enough to tighten the QR skewers. So there you go internet... the Minnesota 2.0 will not fit a 4.8 in the back. However as I posted before it will fit on the front.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

With Bud & Nate...


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

zorg said:


> Turns out that Fedex ground delivers Tuesday-Saturday. One more day...


Same boat


----------



## WiscoHyz (Jan 8, 2014)

Truitnow said:


> With Bud & Nate...


What are your impressions?? I ordered the same setup. A lot of deep snow in Wisconsin and the stock V Missions might as well be road tires.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

The Vee Missions just didn't cut it in the Snow. I tried them for a few days with fresh snow I really lacked grip. The Missions were fine for dry pavement or dirt. Didn't check them in very hilly conditions. This is probably the most common setup on fats today. Love the feel.


----------



## augman440 (Jan 2, 2012)

In my opinion, the stock tires worked real well on packed (in my case, I was riding on a creek where snowmobiles had already worked it over pretty good) snow. As soon as I got in to any untouched deeper snow, I struggled big time. I'm new to fat bikes, but I have a hard time believing any tire would work very well in those conditions. If I'm wrong about that, please let me know! If I'm missing out, I'd love to hear about it. Thx!


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I picked the bike up this afternoon and quickly headed home to assemble it. Just got back from a 14 mile ride and I'm really impressed with the bike.

The bike was very well package and assembly was a breeze. I swapped a bunch of parts this evening and took her for her for her maiden voyage.

The first part of the ride consisted of an abandoned railbed, so I really got to stretch her legs and see how she did. Bike worked flawlessly and felt awesome on those long straight stretches. The second part of our ride consisted of us riding a frozen flood plain with lots of trees which made for a lot of twist and turns which really gave me the opportunity to try out the handling.

The bike felt really nimble and handled great and was a lot of fun.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I also weight some of the parts I was changing or had off the bike.

Stem 153g
Grips 130g
Rotors 240g
Seat 350g
Seat Post 400g
Bars 366g


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

My boxes are in the garage... Didn't get a chance to build it up tonight, but hope to do so tomorrow night. We just got some fresh snow here in Denver, so I hope to take the dog for a snow ride/run tomorrow night. (That's if it's not too cold... It's currently 1F outside right now)

I'll probably end up swapping a bunch of parts. The parts bin has 30.9 post, saddle, grips, etc.

I've got a full XT 9spd drive train that I'm debating swapping. My other two bikes are SRAM, so I'm hesitant to run a mixed fleet. Then again, it's not like I'll be riding super aggressive on the fat bike.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

I've taken mine off road twice, with a few rides on paved paths as well. I changed the chainrings from 28/38 to 22/32, what an improvement that was.. The 28 was too big off road, and I was walking a lot of hills off road. Changed to 22/32 and I didn't walk anything!! 

The stock tires have worked great for me. The mountian bike trails I ride are groomed very well, and they are hard packed. The bike performed great after the gearing change. Before it was hard to tell, because I couldn't get a consistant flow going because it was geared too tall. I ran the front tire at 6.5 pounds, the rear at 7. 
I also had changed the bars to a 20 mm rise, 7 degree sweep Kore OCD , cut down to 720 mm, and the seat to a WTB Rocket. 
My lighting setup is a mess.. I have a Niterider Minewt 150 usb , and an OLD Sigma halogen, with a NIMH battery.. The Minewt at least stayed on the whole time, but 150 lumens was not bright enough (which I didn't expect it to be). My Sigma run time was about 10 minutes, which would have been fine, except I was on a 1 1/2 hour ride. When it worked though, I could see great!! Time for a new light..

I bought the bars to adjust my riding position, and am very happy with that. The bike handled just fine, and I have a feeling it is going to get a lot of use. My only concern with the bike is the stand over. I am 6'01", and have a 20 inch. When I stand over it, I have maybe an inch of clearance, but if I happen to be farther forward on the top tube, I am making contact (lightly). I have stopped on the side of the hard packed trail, stepped off to the ungroomed part, and if I hadn't been aware of it, it would have been painful. It would be nice if the top tube was bent to increase standover.

As you can see, I am quite happy with the bike at this point.


----------



## PerraHunter (Nov 3, 2013)

Well, it had to happen to somebody, and I got picked. 

One fork dropout is too narrow. The axle just does not fit. I suppose I could beat it in with a hammer, but then it would not be a "quick" release anymore. I'll call The House later when I get a break. 

Any suggestions on how you might fix something like this? I've already thought of having a new fork shipped to an LBS, and a hammer.

Thanks.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Could be honed down with a file as is often done with brake calipers or pads.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Truitnow said:


> Could be honed down with a file


x2.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Snopro440 said:


> I've taken mine off road twice, with a few rides on paved paths as well. I changed the chainrings from 28/38 to 22/32, what an improvement that was.. The 28 was too big off road, and I was walking a lot of hills off road. Changed to 22/32 and I didn't walk anything!!
> 
> The stock tires have worked great for me. The mountian bike trails I ride are groomed very well, and they are hard packed. The bike performed great after the gearing change. Before it was hard to tell, because I couldn't get a consistant flow going because it was geared too tall. I ran the front tire at 6.5 pounds, the rear at 7.
> I also had changed the bars to a 20 mm rise, 7 degree sweep Kore OCD , cut down to 720 mm, and the seat to a WTB Rocket.
> ...


I didn't mind the 28/38 gearing on my first ride but we mostly rode hard packed snowmobile trails so the taller gearing worked fine but I can see where it would be an issue in softer conditions.

I run full Shimano XT drive train on my Superfly 100 XC bike and I really missed the precise shifting of my Shimano vs the SRAM X5 stuff. I found the gear shifting a bit vague but it still shifted perfectly.

I'm hopefully going to convert the front tonight to a single 30T Race Face Narrow Wide Chain Ring.

I'm still waiting for my 10 speed Shimano XT Shadow Plus Rear Derailleur to show up, but I'll be going full Shimano XT 10 speed in the rear very soon.

Next big upgrade will be a set of XT Brakes but that's a few months down the road. I'll run the BB5 for now.


----------



## ashe1zer (Feb 5, 2014)

PerraHunter said:


> Well, it had to happen to somebody, and I got picked.
> 
> One fork dropout is too narrow. The axle just does not fit. I suppose I could beat it in with a hammer, but then it would not be a "quick" release anymore. I'll call The House later when I get a break.
> 
> ...


You're not the only one- I'm dealing with the same issue. I e-mailed and called The House on Monday, and I'm still waiting to hear back from them. I've been really tempted to file it, but I want to see what the House is willing to do first.


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

ashe1zer said:


> You're not the only one- I'm dealing with the same issue. I e-mailed and called The House on Monday, and I'm still waiting to hear back from them. I've been really tempted to file it, but I want to see what the House is willing to do first.


Same here. The dropout on the brake side is a bit too narrow. We filed it gently until the drop out would fit.


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Anybody tried to mount a Mr Whirly on it?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

PerraHunter just posted this update on the Facebook Group.

Spoke to Mark on the bike shop side. He knew the problem right away, once I.knew what to look for it was obvious. Apparently if FedEx drops the box just right, they can bend the dropout closed. Yup, my dropout was slightly bent, more at the top than at the base, the plastic fork spacer was broken and the inside of the box showed where the fork was driven into the cardboard. Mark is sending a new.fork.


----------



## PerraHunter (Nov 3, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> PerraHunter just posted this update on the Facebook Group.
> 
> Spoke to Mark on the bike shop side. He knew the problem right away, once I.knew what to look for it was obvious. Apparently if FedEx drops the box just right, they can bend the dropout closed. Yup, my dropout was slightly bent, more at the top than at the base, the plastic fork spacer was broken and the inside of the box showed where the fork was driven into the cardboard. Mark is sending a new.fork.


Yup, like he said. I just got the shipping confirmation e-mail from The House. They also included a return shipping label, so I don't get to have a back up fork. Oh well. I got the impression that The House will be filing claims with fedex--damn right--I'm pissed that I got a broken bike!

Question for you all: How difficult is it to change these forks. Last time I had to do anything like this I was picking up ball bearings for days....

Thanks.


----------



## augman440 (Jan 2, 2012)

Now that I hear this, that's how my bike arrived. I couldn't figure out what the broken piece of plastic at the bottom of the box was (fork spacer) and also explains why it took me a while to get the wheel fitted. Ultimately I did get it fitted up and it must have put everything back into proper position, cause the wheel is well aligned and releases fine.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

It will clear Snowshoes no problem


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Yesterday ..... Beach ....Snow ....oops no beer.


----------



## trailriderjim (Oct 19, 2010)

nice looking bike. was wondering if the salsa enabler fork would fit the 1.0 or 2.0Mn


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Just finished converting to a 1x instead of the 2x setup in the front.

Shifter, Housings, Cable, Derailleur, Chainrings, and bolts was a total of 565g.

Everything was replaced with a single Race Face Narrow Wide 30T ring, Race Face Shims and Race Face Bolts.

Total weight for the new setup is 56g. A weight saving of 509g which is just over 1lbs. Looks awesome and rides real nice. Can't wait to convert the rear to 10 speed.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

I've got to do it. Nice.


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

I had my parents in town the past couple of days, and I got my 70 yr old father to ride my fatty! After a short ride on the road, now he wants one!!! Here is the only pic I could get.


Galen


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

That's awesome Galen. :thumbsup:


----------



## jfaust97 (Oct 1, 2004)

I know it's still too snowy to run them... but how are the second wheel-sets everyone received? Seem like they add any real value to the deal?


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

I guess the Trail set of wheels did not come in time, so they just shipped the bike itself. It makes me wonder, if they were priced as a package or "free wheels", will have to pay duty/tax on the wheels when they get shipped into Canada? What will they determine the value to be?


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

I got my slicks but haven't ridden them yet. They are as heavy as the fat wheels, but they look like they'll work for the intended purpose just fine.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

I listed both my pairs of fattie slims wheelsets for sale in the classifieds. I don't see when I'd ever use them, but hopefully someone will need some! 

I'm really enjoying the bike so far. It's by far my cheapest bike, but it makes me smile when I'm riding it! It beats the heck out of being stuck indoors on a trainer! Figuring out what to wear has been my biggest issue.. It is really cold in Minnesota this winter, so dressing warm enough to keep from freezing vs dressing too warm, sweating, then freezing has been my issue so far!!


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

2LO4U2C said:


> I guess the Trail set of wheels did not come in time, so they just shipped the bike itself. It makes me wonder, if they were priced as a package or "free wheels", will have to pay duty/tax on the wheels when they get shipped into Canada? What will they determine the value to be?


I'm putting studded tires on my slims so I can make the call before the morning commute. If it's soft and mushy I'll run the fats and if it's hard and icy I'll go studded.


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

Should fit fine but why would you want to, I thought mine was heavy and did not handle well. That could have been the frame geometry in the first gen Mukluk that was bad but it still was heavy and ugly. The 2.0 handles much better and is about the same weight as early Mukluk.


trailriderjim said:


> nice looking bike. was wondering if the salsa enabler fork would fit the 1.0 or 2.0Mn


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

The stock Minnesota 2.0 fork comes in at 955g.


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

The Salsa Enabler was over 1200 if I remember right, just another reason not to use one.


Kawidan said:


> The stock Minnesota 2.0 fork comes in at 955g.


----------



## trailriderjim (Oct 19, 2010)

I did little research, your right much heavier. I was just curious if it would fit


----------



## nikj (Jul 7, 2008)

Walked in tonight and picked up my silver 18" 2.0
took a test ride on big lake on my way home so fun


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

Well, for the first time in over 30 years...I busted my arse on a bicycle yesterday! I was riding in the sand and the front tire washed out...and down I went. Landing on the sand was like landing on a giant marshmallow! In all fairness, I was mainly riding on the road, so I didn't drop the pressure in the tires from the 15lbs I was using on the road.

On a side note, on my way home, I noticed that I was steering my fatbike like I would my motorcycle. I was pushing the handlebar down in a curve instead of turning into the curve. I really don't remember if I am normally doing that with my road bike. I almost pulled it out for a quick ride when I got home just to see what I normally did, but was tired and had to get ready for work. 

I didn't get to ride today...but it is supposed to be over 60 degrees tomorrow, so I will have to take the fatbike out and play in the sand tomorrow!

Galen


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

The Minnesota 2.0 participated in her first race today and I'm glad to report that she passed with flying colors and got her first race victory.

We participated in a 5 hour adventure race where they gave you a map with some Check Points that you had to find using your navigation skills and compass.

There was no set course and you basically had to be strategic and try and find the best route to get to each checkpoints. You could do the race on a Fat Bike, by walking, snowshoeing or with skis. The course consisted of snowmobile trails, cross country ski trails, lakes with a fresh coat of powdered snow on them, and some bushwhacking.

The Fat Bikes definitely had an advantage on the XC ski trails and snowmobile trails, but having that advantage meant that you were also breaking trail and making the firsts tracks to a lot of the checkpoints. Our team ended up covering just over 12 miles in 4 hours 20 minutes and managed to find 12 CP's. I really threw all sorts of things at the bike and she performed incredibly well considering the conditions. Not a single problem with it and she was real comfortable for the entire trip. Out of the 12 miles we did, we probably ended up biking between 9 and 10 miles of it with the rest of it having us do some hike a bike.

Overall a great day on the Minnesota.


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

I replaced the chainrings with 22/32 rings. Anybody knows of a solution to get a 40T cog mounted to the 9spd cassette? That would get the short gearing necessary to get up the really steep stuff.


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

I had a chance to play around with my 2.0 during the weekend. I took it along on a Cub Scout campout. First of all, 6 to 10 year old boys think the Minnesota is the coolest bike ever (some of the adults thought the same).

I rode it on a hiking path along the edge of a Cypress swamp. The path got real wet and slippery. No issues there. I went by a couple on regular mountain bikers who were walking and slipping, but the Minnesota kept chugging along. Then I turned onto a powerline trail that was all sugar sand. No problems with the sand for me (other than my legs need more conditioning). I saw some skinny tire tracks and they looked to be doing fine for a while, but when the sugar sand got deep, I could see where they washed out and walked a little. Next was along a small lake with soft sand up top and hard packed at the water line. The Minnesota did fine even with too much air in the tires (around15 psi).

Overall, I am stoked. This is my first Fat Bike, so I cannot compare it to anything else, but it is loads of fun. A buddy is a former mountain bike racer and he thought the geometry was great and very nimble. Whatever... I am smiling all the way!

Take care,

Mike


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I've managed to put on just over 100km/ 60 miles on the Minnesota in the first week of ownership and the bike has performed flawlessly.

I'm very happy with the purchase.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Any slack or worry about the chain line? Spacer on BB correct?
Have my Raceface on order. No chain guide needed.
Great FB group add on Mod.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I removed both stock chainrings, bolts, front derailleur, front shifter, cable and housing. I added a Race Face 30T Narrow Wide Chainring that was 36g and 4 shims and bolts for a total of 56g. In total I saved 510g of weight if I remember correctly.

I've been running it all week with the stock rear 9 speed drivetrain and I haven't had a single dropped chain and it has performed awesome. 

Still waiting for my Shimano XT Shadow Plus Rear Derailleur to show up before I convert the rear to 10 speed, but the 9 speed has worked fine.


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Thanks D.


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

Kawidan, thanks for the info on the 1x10 conversion. I am going to do the same in the near future and your instruction is extremely helpful!

I just got my Big O fenders in today. I had e-mailed them regarding what to order, and the owner e-mailed me back for my phone number to figure out what I needed. He spent over a half an hour to help me out. I ended up ordering a kit for a 907 with 170mm centered rear end. John also threw in some extra hardware to make sure everything worked out. It went together very easily. All you need to be able to do is measure, mark (pencil worked great), drill and screw. In fact, the hardest part was really taking the rear wheel off...lol! It took me right at an hour to knock it out. Here are some pics I took of the kit and the install.

























Overall, I am extremely pleased with the way they turned out. They may not be cheap, but they are exactly what I wanted and John was a great guy to buy from.

Galen

P.S. Sorry for the shaky pictures. I will try to do better next time!


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

Those look really good!


----------



## nikj (Jul 7, 2008)

Does anyone have the sizing for the seat collar clamp not at home at the moment


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

The seat collar clamp needs to be 34.9 or 35.


----------



## Idaho Pakeha (Feb 14, 2014)

Just pulled the trigger on a silver Minnesota 2.0. I ended up buying it off Ebay since it was cheaper and I really didn't want the extra wheels. Of course I bought it just in time for all the snow to melt in pouring 45 degree rain...but I will be taking it to the beach in a few weeks so that will be cool.


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

The Minnesota 2.0 does just fine in sand. I rode a few miles in the sand yesterday. Today will be trails. Tomorrow will probably be mostly road. I love the versatility of this bike! Is it light...not no but hell no! Part of the reason I ride is to get in better shape, and I feel that this bike is a good tool for that goal. When I want to go fast, I have the light road bike for that.

Here is the gratuitous beach pic. I did OK with the out of balance wheels and even though the wind made the 65 degrees a tad nippy, I had a fleece top I got a Walmart off clearance for $5 that kept me warm enough!


Gotta go get dirty!

Galen

Edit: I hate not knowing the location I am viewing. This is Gulfport, Mississippi.


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

Been reading this thread for 2hrs off and on just to find one piece of info, if larger tires would fit... Not only did I find that but much more mods on the white orange one I'm ordering soon (stupid truck cost $200 of my funds to fix). Thnx for the pics and info here, can start planning this build out since I am for sure ordering one of these for my fatty!

Sent from my Nokia Stupidphone using Tapatalk


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Don't forget to look at the Framed Minnesota FB group.


----------



## letitsnow (May 23, 2006)

I rode a friends 2.0 today. It is a nice bike and felt like the weight was similar to my Mukluk 3. The stock tires are really bad in snow though. So bad that I would just take them off and save them for summer riding. My 27 tpi Nate's worked many times better than the Vee Missions. Many, many times better.


----------



## shredmx (Dec 11, 2013)

i am looking at these bikes what is main difference between 1.0 and 2.0? also i am 5'8 with 30inch inseam what size do you recommend. I usually ride a medium but it seems some people size down on these bikes? You cannot get a small seems backordered but not sure if medium is to big. thanks


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

The 1.0 is 1x9 while the 2.0 is 2x9. The 1.0 has a longer top tupe. The 1.0 comes with 72tpi Vee Missions while the 2.0 comes with 120tpi Vee Missions

Also the 1.0 won't be available until Feb 25th.

As for the sizing you should be fine on a 18". I have a 31" inseam and the 18" fits me with lots of clearance on the top tube. This is the sizing

16" -- 5'5" - 5'9"

18" -- 5'8" - 6'0"

20" -- 5'11" - 6'3


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Built mine up yesterday. Rode it once with the fat tires, the the slicks.

Spent last night swapping parts from the parts bin.

9sp XT drivetrain (stock cassettes are HEAVY!)
Hayes Stroker Trail brakes (BB5's weren't strong enough for my tastes)
Parts bin stem (liked a little longer reach)
Different grips
Different seat post clamp (stock clamp is junk)

Anybody notice the front D routing is a little weird with the white tube running down to the derailleur? I think I might skip the front D boss on the seat post and run a longer cable straight to the Front D.


----------



## Pancake Adventure (Aug 14, 2006)

Have seen a couple of these come through now. Not too shabby for the price!

That seat clamp is garbage. The rest of it is about what I expected.


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Great value for the money. If it was my only bike I would be inclined to upgrade more, but it's OK as is. I did shorten the cables and replace the seatpost, seat clamp and grips, but that's it so far. I was surprised at how well the X5 works. As it is, I'll wait until stuff starts breaking/wearing out to replace. It will be interesting to see how it works as a 29er. If it can replace another bike in the stable, I might be more free with the upgrades.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

jfaust97 said:


> I know it's still too snowy to run them... but how are the second wheel-sets everyone received? Seem like they add any real value to the deal?


They added value for me (see below). But, I already have a 4" FS XC 29er (and a 26er/650b 6" AM bike), so I didn't expect the Minnesota 2.0 to be a summer trail bike.



MTBLoCo29 said:


> It will be interesting to see how it works as a 29er.


My needs for a 29er was a town/bike path bike that I could take out when I want to run the dog or want to pedal to the 6 miles to Lowe's to pick up something for the house. I didn't want a road bike because they feel 'frail' to me (I'm a curb hopper) and I don't like the bent over position for riding in traffic.

For these needs, the wheelset works fine. Yes, they are heavy, but I'm not breaking land speed records. Normally we're just putz'ing along on the bike paths, headed to the park or tagging the dog for her jog.


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

> Anybody notice the front D routing is a little weird with the white tube running down to the derailleur? I think I might skip the front D boss on the seat post and run a longer cable straight to the Front D.


Yea, I just cut a piece of housing to fit that section. It relieves the stress forces created by the angled cable at the stops. It works, and IMHO looks better than stock, or skipping the frame cable stop and zip tying.


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

hokiebrett said:


> They added value for me (see below). But, I already have a 4" FS XC 29er (and a 26er/650b 6" AM bike), so I didn't expect the Minnesota 2.0 to be a summer trail bike.
> 
> My needs for a 29er was a town/bike path bike that I could take out when I want to run the dog or want to pedal to the 6 miles to Lowe's to pick up something for the house. I didn't want a road bike because they feel 'frail' to me (I'm a curb hopper) and I don't like the bent over position for riding in traffic.
> 
> For these needs, the wheelset works fine. Yes, they are heavy, but I'm not breaking land speed records. Normally we're just putz'ing along on the bike paths, headed to the park or tagging the dog for her jog.


If the handling is right on, I could see spending some upgrade $ to lighten it up for 29er mode. I know the rims/tires are heavy, but it would be easy enough to lace up some better rims and a lot cheaper than buying a whole wheelset.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Just did a couple more upgrades to mine tonight. I completed the 1x10 conversion by installing a 10 speed XT Shadow Plus Rear Derailleur, SLX Shifter, SLX Cassette and SLX Chain. Also changed the stock tubes to QTubes Superlight tubes and also shorten the cables to clean up the cockpit. I'm now down to 31.5lbs and I'm still waiting on the Carbon Seatpost, Seat and new tires. Should be right at 31lbs once all done.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Rowdy Sluggins said:


> Yea, I just cut a piece of housing to fit that section. It relieves the stress forces created by the angled cable at the stops. It works, and IMHO looks better than stock, or skipping the frame cable stop and zip tying.


My front D has a lot of drag. I'm thinking its where that cable comes through the white tube/front D stop at a weird angle.

Did you just butt the upper end of the cable housing to the cable stop on the seat post? Obviously the stop on the seat post only has an upper "cup", so it can't hold cable going both directions. Does that make sense?

I was thinking skipping the seat post cable frame stop and zip tying... I think it would be fine to just run from the boss/cable stop on top tube and on down to the stop on the front D.


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

hokiebrett said:


> My front D has a lot of drag. I'm thinking its where that cable comes through the white tube/front D stop at a weird angle.
> 
> Did you just butt the upper end of the cable housing to the cable stop on the seat post? Obviously the stop on the seat post only has an upper "cup", so it can't hold cable going both directions. Does that make sense?
> 
> I was thinking skipping the seat post cable frame stop and zip tying... I think it would be fine to just run from the boss/cable stop on top tube and on down to the stop on the front D.


I cut a piece that was the right size to fit between the stops, then put some black cable ends on both sides of the segment. Since the top side (frame mount) doesn't have a cup for the cable stop to sit in, it doesn't look quite as perfect as one would like, but it protects the cable and lines up the forces going to the FD, and looks nicer.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Perfect. Got it. Thanks.


----------



## USUK (Feb 2, 2014)

letitsnow said:


> I rode a friends 2.0 today. It is a nice bike and felt like the weight was similar to my Mukluk 3. The stock tires are really bad in snow though. So bad that I would just take them off and save them for summer riding. My 27 tpi Nate's worked many times better than the Vee Missions. Many, many times better.


Can't compare the 120TPI missions to any other fat tire, but I did reverse tread direction on both wheels, rode for about 2 1/2hrs in a mix of 3 inch fresh, ice and some decent climbing. More testing is required, but there is definitely more grip in the snow and climbing, and a little less self steer on the front.


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

My chain is barely touching the tire when small/large is in use. Does anyone else have this problem? I want to replace my tires in the not so distant future, but it looks like I am severely limited on width.

Thanks all!

Galen


----------



## Pancake Adventure (Aug 14, 2006)

hokiebrett said:


> I was thinking skipping the seat post cable frame stop and zip tying... I think it would be fine to just run from the boss/cable stop on top tube and on down to the stop on the front D.


You should do that. Then the cable can run through the hole on the front derailleur correctly, instead of rubbing and making things feel crappy.


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

I was also thinking of just drilling out the bottom of the cable stop on the seat tube, and turning it into a cable guide, but I decided it might be a little tricky, so I decided I'd let someone else post a DIY.


----------



## Pancake Adventure (Aug 14, 2006)

You could really go over the top and make it more complicated than it needs to be:

Problem Solvers


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Rowdy Sluggins said:


> I was also thinking of just drilling out the bottom of the cable stop on the seat tube, and turning it into a cable guide, but I decided it might be a little tricky, so I decided I'd let someone else post a DIY.


That could be done with a dremel tool in about 5 minutes... But you'd still have to use a zip tie


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

hokiebrett said:


> That could be done with a dremel tool in about 5 minutes... But you'd still have to use a zip tie


Why would you need a zip tie? It's a cable guide!


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

Pancake Adventure said:


> You could really go over the top and make it more complicated than it needs to be:
> 
> Problem Solvers


Ok, somehow I got a link in my email from this that has a better (and cheaper) solution:
Jagwire Cable Guide


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Rowdy Sluggins said:


> Why would you need a zip tie? It's a cable guide!


I guess what I'm envisioning is different than what you're envisioning 

I have zero, I repeat, zero problems with skipping the seat tube boss and using a zip tie! Hell, I ran my dropper post cable with zip ties for a year.


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

The House says my Fattie Slims Trail rims and tires have shipped. Have any of you measured the rim width of the Fattie Slims? I am wondering what 29" tires can be fitted to these rims. Could a 29+ tire be used on these rims? Not sure I would ever do that, but I like to know my options.

Take care,

Mike


----------



## trout_smith (Jan 21, 2006)

In case anyone's interested, I tore down my 2.0 and got a pretty good list of weights... sorry about the format, I copied and pasted from Excel. 

(All weighed on Park DS-2 tabletop digital scale - confirmed that stated weight of 137g for front derailleur matches manufacturer's stated weight)

PARTS LIST WITH WEIGHTS FOR FRAMED MINNESOTA 2.0	
Description	Weight (g)	Notes
Pedals, Framed Alloy 607-X	362g	pair
Seatpost clamp	42g 
Seatpost w/ hardware	398g 
Saddle, Velo Plush	346g 
Grips, w/ clamps	124g	pair
Bar w/ end caps (5g pair)	322g 
Stem	150g 
Chain, KMC X-9 113 links w/ 2 quick links	288g 
Cassette, SRAM 9-sp 11/34 w/ lock ring	448g 
Crankset, Truvativ 28/38/Bash 892g 
Crank Bolts	26g 
Shifter, Front 2-sp SRAM X-5	125g 
Front Shifter Cable / Housing	31g 
Derailleur, Front 2x10 SRAM X-7	137g 
Headset, Neco 1-1/8 w/ 15mm Spacer	115g 
Stem Cap / Bolt	16g 
Other stem spacers, 10mm	15g	total for 2
Front Wheel w/ skewer and rotor	1694g	stock rim strips replaced with vinyl tape and duct tape
Rear Wheel w/ skewer and rotor, no cassette	1870g	stock rim strips replaced with vinyl tape and duct tape
Tube, Vee Rubber 26" x 4.0" #1	476g	Wow - wide range here
Tube, Vee Rubber 26" x 4.0" #2	435g	Wow - wide range here
Tire, Vee Mission 120tpi #1	1399g 
Tire, Vee Mission 120tpi #2	1425g 
Rim Strips, black, stock #1	79g 
Rim Strips, black, stock #2	80g 
Fork, incl. crown race, star nut	934g 
Frame, 2.0 20" incl. BB, hanger, FD bolt, housing clips	2525g	If someone knows bottom bracket weight, I can infer exact frame weight. Inquired of Framed Bikes.

Parts not weighed 
Rear Brake and Lever not weighed
Front Brake and Lever not weighed
Rear Shifter and Derailleur not weighed
Bottom Bracket unknown, could not remove, included in frame weight


----------



## Idaho Pakeha (Feb 14, 2014)

trout_smith said:


> In case anyone's interested, I tore down my 2.0 and got a pretty good list of weights... sorry about the format, I copied and pasted from Excel.
> 
> (All weighed on Park DS-2 tabletop digital scale - confirmed that stated weight of 137g for front derailleur matches manufacturer's stated weight)
> 
> ...


Great, thanks for doing this Trout. This will help me make cost efficient upgrades.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

trout_smith said:


> In case anyone's interested, I tore down my 2.0 and got a pretty good list of weights... sorry about the format, I copied and pasted from Excel.
> 
> (All weighed on Park DS-2 tabletop digital scale - confirmed that stated weight of 137g for front derailleur matches manufacturer's stated weight)
> 
> ...


Thanks a ton for weighing that out...huge help. You rock!


----------



## trout_smith (Jan 21, 2006)

Someone weighed their BB, So I'm inferring that frame is 2,184g (w/ hanger + FD Bolt + housing clips). BB is 341g


----------



## bhc (Sep 27, 2005)

Anybody see this about a 2.0 racing the Crashed Ice course in St. Paul this weekend?

Bikes To Race On Precipitous, Frozen Track At Red Bull 'Crashed Ice' Event | Gear Review | Gear Junkie

Good exposure for the new bike.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

I've decided the stock head set is junk. The split race is made of plastic and there is no amount of alignment that will get it as tight as I want.


----------



## Idaho Pakeha (Feb 14, 2014)

Here are my thoughts on my Minnesota 2.0 after four rides. I only rode it once in the snow (it is all melting here right now) but two things were obvious. It is geared way too high-the 32/22 chainring swap is mandatory. Also the tires aren't great in the snow. It was pretty soft so no tires would have been perfect though. The seatpost did slip a lot, I replaced it with a bolt on model, problem solved.

In the dirt it is a whole different beast. Surprising is the only way to describe it. Surprisingly good at climbing, surprisingly playful handling and surprisingly fast. I initially thought it was going to be a 3 month a year bike but after my ride yesterday I will consider it a very good alternative to my Giant Anthem X 29r. Downhill the thing just rails, may have to upgrade the brakes but they are still breaking in so I will let that slide for now.

I am sure I will replace a bunch of components as they show their weaknesses but right now I would say the only things you need to do are the chainrings and the seatpost clamp.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

bhc said:


> Anybody see this about a 2.0 racing the Crashed Ice course in St. Paul this weekend?
> 
> Bikes To Race On Precipitous, Frozen Track At Red Bull 'Crashed Ice' Event | Gear Review | Gear Junkie
> 
> Good exposure for the new bike.


I was at the event. The course was insane, I can't imagine biking it! The rider on the Minnesota 2.0 took second place but really aired out the last two jumps.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I upgraded the tires to On-One Floaters and I'm very happy with the upgrade.

I've only got 7.5 miles on them but here's a quick comparison to the stock Missions.

I was running 7.5psi front and rear and I didn't notice any additional rolling resistance compared to the Missions which is good.

They are quite a bit noisier on pavement but I'm glad to report, NO MORE SELF STEER on hard surfaces!!!!

Trails are getting quite firmed so I didn't get a chance to test them out in real soft snow but the traction is much better compared to the Missions . I was able to stand up and power up various climbs where as with the Missions I would of had to stay sitting on the seat to get maximum weight on the rear for traction. If I would of tried to stand up and power up a climb with the Missions, I'm pretty sure I would of spun out.

The side grip is also noticeably quite better. I was able to push a lot harder in the corners without having fear that the front was about to wash out at any second. I almost washed out the front twice but the tires got grip and saved me just as the front was starting to go. I'm pretty sure I would of been a goner with the Missions LOL

The other place where I found a great improvement was during breaking, especially while cornering. You can really feel the tire digging into the snow to get you traction.

For the price of them, I think they are a worthwhile upgrade to the bike plus they match the White/Orange Minnesota really well.


----------



## trojan9x (Dec 5, 2005)

Here's the race mentioned above. The bike race starts at 1:42:00
Red Bull TV - Red Bull Crashed Ice 2014


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Pics from today's noon hour ride.


----------



## trojan9x (Dec 5, 2005)

More footage from before the race of the Minnesota 2.0


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

trojan9x said:


> More footage from before the race of the Minnesota 2.0


That's Awesome!


----------



## trojan9x (Dec 5, 2005)

More good press for them. Wonder if they are on a big marketing campaign?

Best Fat Bikes - Gear Patrol


----------



## Idaho Pakeha (Feb 14, 2014)

Any suggestions for improved braking? I have ridden my Minnesota twice on dry trails here in Boise, ID and it flat out rocks on the downhill stuff, especially the sandy corners. However, the brakes could use more power. I don't necessarily want to go XT on them due to cost, but brakes are important. Can you change pads and put a larger rotor on the BB5s? Is it cost efficient?

Thanks


----------



## nikj (Jul 7, 2008)

Anyone put on a carbon fork yet 
Curious


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

nikj said:


> Anyone put on a carbon fork yet
> Curious


A guy on the Facebook Owner's Group put on a Carver O'Beast Carbon Fork and a few guys are waiting on their On-One Carbon Fork.


----------



## AdamJay (Jan 27, 2014)

Kawidan said:


> I upgraded the tires to On-One Floaters and I'm very happy with the upgrade.
> 
> I've only got 7.5 miles on them but here's a quick comparison to the stock Missions.
> 
> ...


Have you had a chance to run these at higher pressure and compare rolling resistance with the Missions? I'm looking to move away from the Missions to a 4" tire that will do a bit of everything (including commuting) that can roll fast on pavement with less self steer.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

AdamJay said:


> Have you had a chance to run these at higher pressure and compare rolling resistance with the Missions? I'm looking to move away from the Missions to a 4" tire that will do a bit of everything (including commuting) that can roll fast on pavement with less self steer.


I've run them at 10psi which is the same pressure that I ran the Mission while commuting and I haven't noticed any additional rolling resistance.

Me and the GF went out this past weekend and I was on the Minnesota with Floaters and she was on the Bigfoot with the stock Mission. After a bit, we switched and she liked the Floaters much better. We were ridding on hard packed snowmobile trails and she commented that she liked the Floaters much better since they seem to roll over the frozen trail much better. I jumped on the Bigfoot and I'd have to agree with her. The Floater's seem to roll a lot better.









The hijacker wearing a pink jacket hijacking my Minnesota.









Once she got on my Minnesota, she never gave it back and I ended up having to ride the Bigfoot for the rest of the ride LOL


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Anyone know if the the front hub is front or rear spaced?


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

Looks like the jig used to locate the front calliper brake mount was a bit off, anyone else have this machined cut into the aluminum? Not a big deal, just curious.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

2LO4U2C said:


> Looks like the jig used to locate the front calliper brake mount was a bit off, anyone else have this machined cut into the aluminum? Not a big deal, just curious.
> 
> View attachment 874162


I just checked mine and it's the same way.


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

What is the seat post diameter? I have some really nice parts from when I was a weight weenie that may make it to this bike.

I also have a Moonlander fork - worth installing? That would make reusing my Big O Mfg fenders easier.


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

I had absolutely no problems mounting my Big O fenders. The hardest part was locating the proper drill bit! If you look back in this post, you can see where I took plenty of pictures of the install. If you need different hardware, give John at Big O a call, he is extremely helpful.

Galen


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

The seatpost is 30.9 and the Seatpost Clamp is 35.


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

Of course. I have a 31.6mm Eaton carbon fiber and 28.6mm Thomson layback.


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Kawidan said:


> I just checked mine and it's the same way.


I think that answers my question about the disk spacing on the front hub. Looks like it is a standard front spaced hub, but the fork was rear spaced (Surly style) so they had to machine the mounting tabs. That means I'll have to get creative with the On-One carbon, since that's rear spaced too. Probably grind down the Avid adaptor plate if there's not enough lateral play.


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

Well, took the 2.0 for the very first ride this afternoon. Gotta be honest...not that impressed. I was riding my local trails here in Maryland on about 4-5" of fresh snow. Climbing of any sort was basically impossible due the rear wheel spinning out, no matter how much weight I shifted back. The bike did seem to be pretty stable on level ground and downhill but not a lot more than my old Fuji 26er. 

I bought the bike primarily to ride when the trails are mucky, so I will stick with it for now, but as a snow bike..eh. I could actually climb better on my regular MTB.


----------



## trojan9x (Dec 5, 2005)

What pressure were you running in the tires? Also, the tires that come on the bike are known for not being great in snow. You may want to look into an upgrade. The on-one floaters seem to be a pretty safe choice.



davidrhorn said:


> Well, took the 2.0 for the very first ride this afternoon. Gotta be honest...not that impressed. I was riding my local trails here in Maryland on about 4-5" of fresh snow. Climbing of any sort was basically impossible due the rear wheel spinning out, no matter how much weight I shifted back. The bike did seem to be pretty stable on level ground and downhill but not a lot more than my old Fuji 26er.
> 
> I bought the bike primarily to ride when the trails are mucky, so I will stick with it for now, but as a snow bike..eh. I could actually climb better on my regular MTB.


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

I lowered them to about 10 pounds (hard to tell exactly with my pump but they were pretty soft). I was actually surprised at how they spun out on even a slight uphill grade. Same stuff I cleaned on my regular MTB after the last storm. 

Would an upgrade to just the rear do the trick? Hate to spend $300+ on new tires already.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

davidrhorn said:


> as a snow bike..eh. I could actually climb better on my regular MTB.


Did you read any of the prior pages in this thread?? Bike ships with spring / summer tires.

Also, few fat bikes / tires can handle 4-5 inches of fresh powder so I'm not surprised you had a struggle.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Truitnow (Dec 31, 2013)

Davidrhorn. There's plenty of talk about the tires not only earlier in this thread but in Mission tire threads. Take a read.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

The stock Missions are not an ideal tire for fresh/loose snow. Even in 4-5 inches of snow, it's going to be a struggle no matter what tire you ride.

If you are looking for an inexpensive tire that offers better traction, take a look at the On-One Floater. They are $64 each and are much better than the stock Missions.

I've put Floater's Front and Back on my Minnesota and it's made world of difference.

On-One Floater Fat Tyre | On - One

Floater's Front and Back on the Minnesota


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

Kawidan said:


> The stock Missions are not an ideal tire for fresh/loose snow. Even in 4-5 inches of snow, it's going to be a struggle no matter what tire you ride.
> 
> If you are looking for an inexpensive tire that offers better traction, take a look at the On-One Floater. They are $64 each and are much better than the stock Missions.
> 
> ...


Can you climb with these tires? I am willing to drop $64 each if it means I will be able to actually ride uphill in the snow. Wondering how they do in muddy/mucky sections? Have you ridden in muck? Thanks for the help!


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

davidrhorn said:


> Can you climb with these tires? I am willing to drop $64 each if it means I will be able to actually ride uphill in the snow. Wondering how they do in muddy/mucky sections? Have you ridden in muck? Thanks for the help!


I can climb way better than with the stock Missions. With the Missions, on any climb I'd have to stay seated to try and put maximum weight on the rear tire to get traction. With the Floater, I can actually stand up and put down some power to get up climbs.

Now keep in mind that we haven't had any big snowfall since I've gotten them but in the current conditions, they are way better.

I haven't had a chance to try them in muddy/mucky sections since we have several feet of snow up here in Canada but if you look in here, you will see that the Floater gets great reviews as a great all around tire.

http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/one-floater-tire-review-848817.html


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

Kawidan said:


> I can climb way better than with the stock Missions. With the Missions, on any climb I'd have to stay seated to try and put maximum weight on the rear tire to get traction. With the Floater, I can actually stand up and put down some power to get up climbs.


Did you try running the rear Mission backwards before switching to the Floaters?

Finally got my MN 2.0 on snow today... Denver got a surprise 2-4" overnight, so I took the dog for a ride this AM. Did about 6.5 miles on quite a range of conditions (4" fresh over dirt/grass, hard packed over concrete, ice on concrete, and wet concrete). Definitely had fun and got lots of smiles from the other pedestrians out enjoying the snow.

No hills to speak of, but definitely had fun! The dog loved running in the snow! With her hiking harness on, she actually towed me for a little while... (Which is impressive considering I'm 190# out of the shower and was on a 35# fat bike)


----------



## Greenfin (Jun 13, 2011)

davidrhorn said:


> Well, took the 2.0 for the very first ride this afternoon. Gotta be honest...not that impressed. I was riding my local trails here in Maryland on about 4-5" of fresh snow. Climbing of any sort was basically impossible due the rear wheel spinning out, no matter how much weight I shifted back. The bike did seem to be pretty stable on level ground and downhill but not a lot more than my old Fuji 26er.
> 
> I bought the bike primarily to ride when the trails are mucky, so I will stick with it for now, but as a snow bike..eh. I could actually climb better on my regular MTB.h


Get a NATE or Dillinger turned around for traction and you will delete this post.


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

hokiebrett said:


> Did you try running the rear Mission backwards before switching to the Floaters?
> 
> Finally got my MN 2.0 on snow today... Denver got a surprise 2-4" overnight, so I took the dog for a ride this AM. Did about 6.5 miles on quite a range of conditions (4" fresh over dirt/grass, hard packed over concrete, ice on concrete, and wet concrete). Definitely had fun and got lots of smiles from the other pedestrians out enjoying the snow.
> 
> No hills to speak of, but definitely had fun! The dog loved running in the snow! With her hiking harness on, she actually towed me for a little while... (Which is impressive considering I'm 190# out of the shower and was on a 35# fat bike)


Didn't even occur to me to try that. I will give it a go this weekend (my knee is still healing up from the attempted climbing two days ago!). Thanks!

Also looking into switching out the 28 tooth chainring to a 22 or 24. Gearing is not set up for any sort of real climbing, especially for someone with arthritic knees!


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

davidrhorn said:


> Didn't even occur to me to try that. I will give it a go this weekend (my knee is still healing up from the attempted climbing two days ago!). Thanks!
> 
> Also looking into switching out the 28 tooth chainring to a 22 or 24. Gearing is not set up for any sort of real climbing, especially for someone with arthritic knees!


A couple of guys on the Facebook Owner's Group have gone to this 32/22 setup and have been very pleased with the gearing.

Race Face 9 Speed Ring and Bash Set > Components > Drivetrain > Chainrings | Jenson USA Online Bike Shop


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

Kawidan said:


> A couple of guys on the Facebook Owner's Group have gone to this 32/22 setup and have been very pleased with the gearing.
> 
> Race Face 9 Speed Ring and Bash Set > Components > Drivetrain > Chainrings | Jenson USA Online Bike Shop


Thanks for the link! If my LBS doesn't have something similar I will order it ASAP. Kind of surprised a 28-38 would come stock on such a heavy bike. I would think any steep climbing even in dry conditions would be a beast of a challenge with that set up!


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I run a 38/26 on my Trek Superfly 100 XC bike in the summer time, so I'm thinking they probably went with a higher gearing since some people will probably want to use their slim wheelset in the summer time and make it a commuter. In that case the 38/28 would probably make more sense.


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

Kawidan said:


> I run a 38/26 on my Trek Superfly 100 XC bike in the summer time, so I'm thinking they probably went with a higher gearing since some people will probably want to use their slim wheelset in the summer time and make it a commuter. In that case the 38/28 would probably make more sense.


Makes sense. It would be really cool if they gave you a choice. Along with maybe a choice of cassette gearing too. Of course, at this price I am sure they are locked into just one set-up.


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

davidrhorn said:


> Can you climb with these tires? I am willing to drop $64 each if it means I will be able to actually ride uphill in the snow. Wondering how they do in muddy/mucky sections? Have you ridden in muck? Thanks for the help!


Where are y'all finding them for $64? On One lists them for 49.99 GBP, which Google says is over $80 USD... (and I thought the USD was strong right now?)


----------



## 06HokieMTB (Apr 25, 2011)

davidrhorn said:


> Of course, at this price I am sure they are locked into just one set-up.


I'm now wondering if I really came ahead buying this bike...

I'm about to buy new tires and looking at my MN 2.0, not much is stock. Thing's I've changed:

1) Saddle, seatpost, seat post clamp
2) Handlebar, stem & grips
3) Drivetrain (Now running XT/Race Face chain rings, cassette, chain, shifters... may change again to 2x10 instead of 2x9. Even changed the bashguard)
4) Brakes (now running Hayes Stroker Trail brakes, with 185 avid rotors up front)

Lol. Maybe i should've just built up a fatty frame?


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

hokiebrett said:


> I'm now wondering if I really came ahead buying this bike...
> 
> Maybe i should've just built up a fatty frame?


Keep swapping out parts, once you have a complete bike in the parts bin, then swap the parts onto a new frame and sell the original.


----------



## Nater (Jan 6, 2004)

hokiebrett said:


> Where are y'all finding them for $64? On One lists them for 49.99 GBP, which Google says is over $80 USD... (and I thought the USD was strong right now?)


Change the currency on the top of the On One website to USD...they're $77.23 each right now.

But put them in your cart and change shipping to the US and the price drops to $64.36 each (because they subtract the VAT).

If you order two of them, shipping to the US is free. Two Floaters shipped to the US from the UK for $128.72.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

Looks like China/Taiwan are already trying to make their version of the Minnesota. Don't get me wrong...I know 90% of bikes come from Asia but the knock offs that you see being sold by non-brands look like ****. It looks like they bought one and painted over it. They have an older Vee Rubber Mission on the rear but one of those spider treads on the front. To be honest I'm sort supervised they didn't add any suspension.

On another note, I'm excited to see what Vee Rubber has just launched at the Taipei show...I want a set of the snowshoe XL's!

Knock Off-
Taipei International Cycle Show-Products-BICYCLE FAT BIKE SNOW BIKE BEACH BIKE - BIKEIDEATION-IDEATION INDUSTRIAL CO., LTD.

Vee Rubber-
VA gets a (tiny) new trail


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

mncyclist said:


> Looks like China/Taiwan are already trying to make their version of the Minnesota. Don't get me wrong...I know 90% of bikes come from Asia but the knock offs that you see being sold by non-brands look like ****. It looks like they bought one and painted over it. They have an older Vee Rubber Mission on the rear but one of those spider treads on the front. To be honest I'm sort supervised they didn't add any suspension.
> 
> On another note, I'm excited to see what Vee Rubber has just launched at the Taipei show...I want a set of the snowshoe XL's!
> 
> ...


Sorry...wrong link for the Vee Tire info
Taipei Cycle Show: Vee Tire Co. Fatbike Tires ? Bigger, Studded, 29+, and 27.5? Fatbikes?


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

Anyone install a Chris King headset yet?

Stock fork or Moonlander fork?


Bike arrived today and I'm already digging through my parts bin...


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

Finally got some seat time on the 2.0. Overall I'm happy with it, but I really don't like some of the components. Already have it torn down to parade rest and am rebuilding it and answered most of my own questions. Drivetrain is bloody awful - what is SRAM X5/X7 compare to in the Shimano line? I'm sure everyone else knows, but the headset is 44mm.

I'd like to hear brake upgrade suggestions. Hydraulic are tempting, but 180mm or 200mm BB7s seems like a much more economical upgrade.


----------



## linklight (Mar 9, 2014)

I replaced the BB5s on my Minnesota 2.0 with Avid DB1s that I got on ebay. The DB1s feel great but spokes and front caliper are really close. I used the bolts from the bb5 which gave me slightly more clearance. I'm going to swap the front rotor to 185mm to get more clearance. Its probably fine but I don't want to risk spokes flexing and get caught up in the caliper.


----------



## coyote old man (Mar 9, 2014)

thanks to all of your posts ive scored a minn. 2.0-might be a few places to explore here in mecca...will have lbs assemble and look for headset race issues and brake cable line up--thanks for heads up...will have to see if chain rings are too big for hills, sand and slickrock...prolly good for road slick though-will default to whats best for off road--am wondering how pumping air on giant tires will work out w/ frame pump while on trail (after i get a low air guage) and will the tires be thick enough to fool goat heads? otherwise i stay on trail--those things lie dormant for 1000s of years.


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

A high volume frame pump will work, but it will be a good upper body workout, and goatheads? They will win every time, just stay away.


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

2LO4U2C said:


> Looks like the jig used to locate the front calliper brake mount was a bit off, anyone else have this machined cut into the aluminum? Not a big deal, just curious.
> 
> View attachment 874162


It gets worse. I'm in process of a brake upgrade and ran into another snag - not only is the fork bracket machined, but so is the caliper adapter. And it has a taper too - 7.94mm at the bottom, 9.16mm at the top. They used a few washers on the top bolt to keep it out of the rotor. They hit the machined surface with black spray paint.

I may be using the Moonlander fork after all. I'll check clearances tonight to see if it's any better.


----------



## linklight (Mar 9, 2014)

CurtP said:


> It gets worse. I'm in process of a brake upgrade and ran into another snag - not only is the fork bracket machined, but so is the caliper adapter. And it has a taper too - 7.94mm at the bottom, 9.16mm at the top. They used a few washers on the top bolt to keep it out of the rotor. They hit the machined surface with black spray paint.
> 
> I may be using the Moonlander fork after all. I'll check clearances tonight to see if it's any better.


I don't have that problem on my Minnesota 2.0 fork. I replaced the BB5s with Avid hydraulic disc brakes and it aligned fine. Have you contacted their warranty department? Sounds like a manufacturing defect.


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

linklight said:


> I don't have that problem on my Minnesota 2.0 fork. I replaced the BB5s with Avid hydraulic disc brakes and it aligned fine. Have you contacted their warranty department? Sounds like a manufacturing defect.


I'm guessing you reused the adapter and stuck with 160mm discs. If I wasn't going to a bigger rotor, I could just reuse what's on there, but I need the 40mm IS mount. I could take it over to my buddy's house and mill it down, but I prefer to be able to use OTS parts.

It's not a manufacturing defect - it's been done on purpose. Anyone else want to pop off their adapter to see if they have the same thing?


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

CurtP said:


> It's not a manufacturing defect - it's been done on purpose. Anyone else want to pop off their adapter to see if they have the same thing?


I'll check mine in a bit


----------



## linklight (Mar 9, 2014)

CurtP said:


> I'm guessing you reused the adapter and stuck with 160mm discs. If I wasn't going to a bigger rotor, I could just reuse what's on there, but I need the 40mm IS mount. I could take it over to my buddy's house and mill it down, but I prefer to be able to use OTS parts.


You are correct. I reused the 160mm rotor and adaptor. I took my adaptor off and it wasn't milled. I was thinking the rotor would align better if it was milled though. Maybe I have a fork that is out of spec and they fixed it by milling the adaptor and bracket on subsequent forks hence you have the "improved" one.

The rotor is aligned well now where the brake pads don't drag but I think the alignment setting is maxed out so no more room for adjustment. If it was milled, I would have a little room to adjust.

The only way I was able to center the rotor where it doesnt drag was to push the pistons in and use a business card wedged between the outer pad and rotor before tightening the alignment screws and setting the pads.


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

Are you sure yours isn't milled? I didn't notice that mine was until I installed the new one, saw it rubbing on the rotor and started to investigate. Nothing prompted me to even look at the old one. Maybe the kids that put together the bike in China make adjustments as needed. I just looked real close at mine - it was definitely done by a mill - I can see circular cuts across the face. My fork doesn't look as deeply milled as 2LO's. Maybe that's why my adapter has so much off of it.

I'm not exactly sure what I'm going to do now. I checked clearances with the Moonlander, and it's the exact same way. The hub pushes the rotor too far towards the fork. I could mill the hub if I wanted to take the wheel apart, but if I'm going through that trouble, I'm getting better hubs. If I get better hubs, are the rims worth good hubs? And then what do I do with the 29ers - re-hub those too? I guess I could stick with 160mm rotors up front, but I'd like both the front and rear to match.

Looks like I'm making two calls tomorrow - one to The House and one to my buddy with the mill.


So far, the rest of the build is going ok. Still waiting for the front derailleur and some misc parts to come in - hopefully tomorrow. Had to order a new stem when I discovered the new EC70 bars were 31.8mm where my Bontranger stem is a 25.4mm. And for whatever reason, Shimano brake cables only come with two ferrules and I need four. Rear derailleur, crankset, seat post and seat post clamp came in today. Liked the seat post clamp so much, I ordered a set of matching skewers - I'll move my modified Bontranger skewers over to the 29ers.


----------



## linklight (Mar 9, 2014)

CurtP said:


> Are you sure yours isn't milled? I didn't notice that mine was until I installed the new one, saw it rubbing on the rotor and started to investigate. Nothing prompted me to even look at the old one. Maybe the kids that put together the bike in China make adjustments as needed. I just looked real close at mine - it was definitely done by a mill - I can see circular cuts across the face. My fork doesn't look as deeply milled as 2LO's. Maybe that's why my adapter has so much off of it.
> 
> I'm not exactly sure what I'm going to do now. I checked clearances with the Moonlander, and it's the exact same way. The hub pushes the rotor too far towards the fork. I could mill the hub if I wanted to take the wheel apart, but if I'm going through that trouble, I'm getting better hubs. If I get better hubs, are the rims worth good hubs? And then what do I do with the 29ers - re-hub those too? I guess I could stick with 160mm rotors up front, but I'd like both the front and rear to match.
> 
> ...


I'm at the beach with my bike to see how it performs on the sand. I will check when I get home Saturday evening.

Wow... you are upgrading a lot of stuff. I was thinking the bike had decent components and didn't need much. X7 front derailleur, x5 rear derailleur and shifters work well. I have X7s on my Trek full suspension 29er and never had any issues.

I changed to hydraulic disc brakes because I had to cut off the Avid FR5 levers because I couldn't adjust the angle of the brake levers - the screw was on too tight.


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

I've been riding mine on the beach. Second ride out and the chain snapped. Fixed it, and it broke again at a different location on the next ride. I never could get the front derailleur dialed in either, so I decided to do a few upgrades. FWIW, the front derailleur is made for a 2x10 setup.

I'm debating if I should install my Vee8 or stay with the Missions. The Vee8 I have are 60tpi though. I'm not overly impressed with the missions in the sand.


----------



## linklight (Mar 9, 2014)

Took my Minnesota 2.0 to the beach for the first time. Had so much fun riding on the sand. Covered about 13 miles on the beach.

The bike performed surprisingly well with stock gears and stock tires. I was even able to climb some dune crossings with soft sand. The key was to the keep the momentum up and keep pedaling. Some parts of the sand was as slippery as snow.


----------



## Stumpy91 (Jan 17, 2014)

linklight said:


> Took my Minnesota 2.0 to the beach for the first time. Had so much fun riding on the sand. Covered about 13 miles on the beach.
> 
> The bike performed surprisingly well with stock gears and stock tires. I was even able to climb some dune crossings with soft sand. The key was to the keep the momentum up and keep pedaling. Some parts of the sand was as slippery as snow.
> 
> ...


Great pics to contrast with the snow of Minnesota.


----------



## linklight (Mar 9, 2014)

CurtP said:


> I'm guessing you reused the adapter and stuck with 160mm discs. If I wasn't going to a bigger rotor, I could just reuse what's on there, but I need the 40mm IS mount. I could take it over to my buddy's house and mill it down, but I prefer to be able to use OTS parts.
> 
> It's not a manufacturing defect - it's been done on purpose. Anyone else want to pop off their adapter to see if they have the same thing?


You are correct. The front adaptor is milled on my Minnesota 2.0. It's milled almost to the bolt hole. That's a great catch and you are also correct this makes it harder to go to a bigger rotor without milling the adaptor.

I actually used the 160mm adaptor that came with my Avid hyraulics hence that is why i said my adaptor wasn't milled - I forgot I switched it because I thought it was the same. I was able to align it without disk rub but no more room for adjustment using the new adaptor. I installed the original adaptor back which gave me a little more to clearance to align.


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

I called The House on Friday, but didn't get very far. The guy in the shop that allegedly knows about these things was gone for the day. Guess I'll call back on Monday.

I milled the adapter yesterday, but I still have rubbing. I'll mill more off of it tomorrow. If I can't get the clearance I need, I guess I'll be running a 160mm up front.

My original adapter is just outside of the threaded bosses, and has a noticeable taper. I'm taking material off both sides on the new one, but it looks like I'll be pretty close to the threaded bosses on this one too.


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

According to the digital bathroom scale that always reminds me how fat I am, the bike is currently at 33.60 lbs. I'll have a more accurate weight in a few days.

Build is almost complete. I had a strand on a shifter cable break and wad up when I tried to adjust it. No idea why - brand new Shimano PTFE cable. Ordered a new inner last night. I don't think the 3x9 XT derailleur is going to work. It sits too high on the mount. I have it adjusted to hit the middle and lower chain ring grooves, but the chain has a tendency to jump the big gear when banging through the gears. Looks like I'm going to have to go with a 2x10 front derailleur. I've changed the cables around somewhat. I'm no longer using the cable stop on the seat tube.

Front caliper adapter was milled and everything is dialed in. I don't like how close I had to get to the threaded boss to get the clearance, so I'll be making another adapter sometime this week. I still need to trim down the handlebars.


----------



## AdamJay (Jan 27, 2014)

How are these Quando hubs on the 80mm rims working out for you guys on the Minnesota 2.0? 
I'm looking at buying just the front wheel from the-house.com for my fat bike as it's affordably priced, and I could use it for a slicker 3.5" commuter tire in the summer. 

My experience with Quando hubs in the past was that they weren't all that serviceable and didn't spin that fast.


----------



## Mr. Doom (Sep 23, 2005)

AdamJay said:


> How are these Quando hubs on the 80mm rims working out for you guys on the Minnesota 2.0?
> I'm looking at buying just the front wheel from the-house.com for my fat bike as it's affordably priced, and I could use it for a slicker 3.5" commuter tire in the summer.
> 
> My experience with Quando hubs in the past was that they weren't all that serviceable and didn't spin that fast.


Replacement freehub bodies may be more difficult to replace, (not shimano), heavy but they spin as fast as any hub. (Shimano 8-9 speed hubs are more reliable IMO).


----------



## AdamJay (Jan 27, 2014)

Mr. Doom said:


> Replacement freehub bodies may be more difficult to replace, (not shimano), heavy but they spin as fast as any hub. (Shimano 8-9 speed hubs are more reliable IMO).


Sure, I just wonder on a scale of 1-10, how reliable these Quando 135mm front hubs are.

Are they sealed cartridge bearings? Cup and cone?


----------



## augman440 (Jan 2, 2012)

*first ride on beach*









Finally got out for some nice riding this weekend along Lake Michigan here in eastern Wisconsin. My first real fat bike experience and no complaints except for all the solid ice that is still out there. I'm digging the ride! Where the sand was exposed the bike rode awesome. Where the ice wasn't too 'glare' it rode well there too. It was very flat, so I didn't notice any gearing issues. I thought the tires worked great in the cold hard sand, but I would guess that most any tire would...


----------



## linklight (Mar 9, 2014)

Prior to buying the Minnesota 2.0 - I was considering buying a Surly Krampus. I'm very pleased with my Minnesota thus far and still surprised that this bike is under $1000. 

My Minnesota came with a second set of fatty slim wheels. I did 8 miles on pavement with the fatty slims. It felt good and felt just like my hybrid bike. I have 5 other bikes so I don't see myself swapping the wheels to ride the Minnesota on the street often. I actually prefer it as a fat bike. 

Now I'm wondering if I can mount the Surly Knards 29x3 tires on this fatty slim rim and if it will have enough clearance on the Minnesota 2.0. Anybody have a Surly Knards mounted on the fatty slim rims on their Minnesota 2.0?


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

Cup and cone. There's a rubber seal to keep crud out, but they're not sealed. Fairly easy to service though.


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

I've got about 12 hours total on the 2.0, mostly in mud and soft trail conditions. Honest assessment..wish I had saved up some more money and bought a better quality bike. I should've taken my hint while doing research when I read about all of the upgrades you guys have been putting into it. I would rate it a C+ at this point. Prior to replacing the rear tire with a Surly Nate I would've rated it a D-. Poor component group, sketchy shifting (probably due to cheap chain and cassette vs. derailleur). 18" is not really suitable for someone 5'10.5" like the shop recommended. Should've bought the 20". Frame geometry is strange...too short of a top tube. Front hub worked loose after third ride. Horrible gear set up with 28-38, no good if you have any sort of climbing and impossible if climbing in mud or snow. Had to switch the 28 to a 22. With the steep sections of my local trail I will probably switch out the cassette too. So, now I am over $200 into upgrades/changes. Should've saved for 6 more months and bought a Surly or Fatback or anything other than the Framed.

Just my 2 cents. I guess if I were riding groomed snow or sand it would be great. For real trail riding...booo!


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

*cheap fix to moving fender...*









After each downhill I noticed the Mud Shovel rear fender would move and I would have to stop and center it. No matter how hard I pulled that strap tight it would move. I came up with an ugly but functional solution. Cost me less that $5.


----------



## AdamJay (Jan 27, 2014)

davidrhorn said:


> After each downhill I noticed the Mud Shovel rear fender would move and I would have to stop and center it.


Nice solution. I use a rubber shim beneath the strap for more grip around the seatpost. Stays put.


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

AdamJay said:


> Nice solution. I use a rubber shim beneath the strap for more grip around the seatpost. Stays put.


Thanks! If and when my contraption breaks I will try the shim. Maybe even do both, why not?


----------



## AdamJay (Jan 27, 2014)

davidrhorn said:


> Front hub worked loose after third ride.


Do you feel this is due to the quality of the hub itself or the assembly job?


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

AdamJay said:


> Do you feel this is due to the quality of the hub itself or the assembly job?


Hard to say. Easy fix but frustrating that it worked loose so quickly. Had a friend tighten it with some cone wrenches...took about 3 minutes. Funny how my Fuji Reveal mountain bike I had for 7 years and I rode an average of 3 days per week never needed any adjustment.


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

davidrhorn said:


> I've got about 12 hours total on the 2.0, mostly in mud and soft trail conditions. Honest assessment..wish I had saved up some more money and bought a better quality bike. I should've taken my hint while doing research when I read about all of the upgrades you guys have been putting into it. I would rate it a C+ at this point. Prior to replacing the rear tire with a Surly Nate I would've rated it a D-. Poor component group, sketchy shifting (probably due to cheap chain and cassette vs. derailleur). 18" is not really suitable for someone 5'10.5" like the shop recommended. Should've bought the 20". Frame geometry is strange...too short of a top tube. Front hub worked loose after third ride. Horrible gear set up with 28-38, no good if you have any sort of climbing and impossible if climbing in mud or snow. Had to switch the 28 to a 22. With the steep sections of my local trail I will probably switch out the cassette too. So, now I am over $200 into upgrades/changes. Should've saved for 6 more months and bought a Surly or Fatback or anything other than the Framed.
> 
> Just my 2 cents. I guess if I were riding groomed snow or sand it would be great. For real trail riding...booo!


I understand some of your dissatisfaction, but I feel obligated to defend the bike a little. I have never bought a bike that I didn't end up swapping parts on. In fact most of the time I start with a frame and build it up myself because I'm so picky. The bike cost 900 bucks with an extra set of wheels. That should have been a clue that an upgrade or two would be in order. The tires do suck for most things, and the grearing is too high even for sand or snow. As far as geometry, I'm 5'10" and I stuck a 110 stem on my 18" and it fits me like a glove and handles fine - problem solved. I also swapped chainrings to a more reasonable 36x24. So with stem, gearing changes, new tires, you have a pretty sweet fat bike. Remember, it's a fat bike, and it is never going to be as good on trails as a trail bike. 
I'm really happy with mine, and I've probably got about 1100 into it. Not bad when compared to the alternatives.


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

Rowdy Sluggins said:


> I understand some of your dissatisfaction, but I feel obligated to defend the bike a little. I have never bought a bike that I didn't end up swapping parts on. In fact most of the time I start with a frame and build it up myself because I'm so picky. The bike cost 900 bucks with an extra set of wheels. That should have been a clue that an upgrade or two would be in order. The tires do suck for most things, and the grearing is too high even for sand or snow. As far as geometry, I'm 5'10" and I stuck a 110 stem on my 18" and it fits me like a glove and handles fine - problem solved. I also swapped chainrings to a more reasonable 36x24. So with stem, gearing changes, new tires, you have a pretty sweet fat bike. Remember, it's a fat bike, and it is never going to be as good on trails as a trail bike.
> I'm really happy with mine, and I've probably got about 1100 into it. Not bad when compared to the alternatives.


I hear ya, I guess I should've had an open mind going in. I was so excited to get out in the snow and the first day was horrible. My knee was screaming due to the lousy gear set up and I couldn't climb even the slightest hill due to rear wheel spin out. I went from ecstatic to pissed in about 5 minutes.

The few upgrades I've done have made a huge difference, just wish Framed could've set it up like this from the get-go.

I just switched out my stem with an adjustable 110. So far I've only put about $200 total extra into the bike ($150 was on the rear tire). The chainring was just $10 (went with a 22 tooth) and I had a set of pedals in a box, I have to be clicked in. Put some new grips on and then the fenders (which would've been put on any fat bike). Happier now but not ecstatic overall about the Minnesota.


----------



## Rowdy Sluggins (Jan 30, 2014)

> I went from ecstatic to pissed in about 5 minutes.


I hear ya there! It's easy to get super bummed when things aren't working out, especially when your on the bike and things suck. The bike seems pretty easily upgradable though. I haven't done the tires yet, because the snow around my area is gone, and I've been layin' down the miles on the road bike. I will definitely upgrade the tires before next winter, but I'm waiting because there are so many new options coming out (leaning towards the new non-xl snowshoe, or on-one floaters so far). Overall, I still feel like the bike was a real bargain.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

davidrhorn said:


> just wish Framed could've set it up like this from the get-go.


Understand your desire for a Fat Bike to be snow ready out of the box (they are advertised as such). However, I arrived at a slightly different conclusion during my decision process. I considered a Salsa Muk3, Trek Farley and Pugsley when shopping for a fat bike. They all had winter tires on them, but not the ones I would want long term for conditions here in MN. Since snow conditions vary so much all over the country I think it is better to let riders buy the right winter tire (if needed) and Framed's decision to put summer tires on the bike is a good one.

I'm with Rowdy that a part of the appeal of any bike is getting to do upgrades and making it my own and that was my expectation going in.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

The only original parts on mine are the wheels, frame, fork and seat. And it would have been the same thing no matter what bike I chose. Happens every time I buy a bike.


----------



## linklight (Mar 9, 2014)

*My Mods*

I changed a couples of things on my Minnesota 2.0 and I'm happy with the upgrades:


Avid Hydraulic Disc Brakes
32/22T chain ring
Raceface bashguard
Lizardskins chainstay protector
Replaced front derailleur cable

Brakes - Hydraulic discs feel better than the original BB5 mechanical discs. I had problems trying to adjust the angle of the BB5 levers. The screws were so tight I managed to strip the allen screws so I had to resort to cutting off the levers. That sealed the decision to go with hydraulic disc brakes. I also managed to strip one of the rotor bolts as well. Seems like a common theme on this bike - many of the screws are torqued way too tight.

Chainrings - I originally thought that the 38/28T gearing was fine and I could have probably lived with it. Going to a 32/22T chainring gave me 2 extra low gears and I only gave up one tall gear. Sounds like a good trade off to me. I never used the tallest cog on the rear cassette anyways. I had to remove 2 links from the chain and I had to remove the crank arm to replace the small chainring. The crank arm was super tight and I had a hard time getting it off.

Bashguard - Swapped out the stock bash guard to get more clearance since I moved to a smaller ring.

Front derailleur cable - the front derailleur cable wasn't threaded correctly. The X7 front derailleur has a small hole for the cable to pass through before locking the cable down. They bypassed the hole / guide which made it difficult to adjust the cable tension because the cable was in the way of the allen screw. I replaced the front cable and threaded it correctly.

I also bought Mission Vee 8s and I'm planning to convert the tires to tubeless.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

davidrhorn said:


> For real trail riding...booo!


Snow has finally melted and I was able to get in some trail riding over the past week. I'd give the exact opposite perspective.... as I had a blast! This bike rips on trails! For anyone considering a Minnesota 2.0 for summer fat bike riding, do it. The geometry is perfect for tight single track and I actually found the Mission tires work well with their low rolling resistance.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

mn_biker said:


> Snow has finally melted and I was able to get in some trail riding over the past week. I'd give the exact opposite perspective.... as I had a blast! This bike rips on trails! For anyone considering a Minnesota 2.0 for summer fat bike riding, do it. The geometry is perfect for tight single track and I actually found the Mission tires work well with their low rolling resistance.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I agree with Mn_Biker, I am having a blast on the trails. I have lots of roots and limestone/coral rock to deal with, both of which can get slippery. No problems and lots of fun. I am not an expert (this is my first fat bike), but it goes just fine on these conditions. I am loving it! Am I getting passed by the 29 crowd and FS guys? Yes, but they would be passing me no matter what I am riding! I do have a bigger smile on my face than all of the other riders.

Take care,

Mike


----------



## CurtP (Mar 2, 2014)

My On One Floaters arrived the other day - what a difference! Schwalbe tubes arrived today - going to attempt tubeless this weekend.


----------



## dliquid1 (Jun 29, 2011)

After getting my green On-Ones tires and the pdw Dave's Mud Shovel fenders on the bike I am very happy with how it rides and looks.  It is quite nice to ride in the sloppy trails and fields around the house without coming back completely covered in mud.


----------



## Barheet (Jul 13, 2012)

Wow so after reading all the posts on this thread, the moral of the story is: If you buy a Framed, you will upgrade a lot of parts. Good to know.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

Barheet said:


> Wow so after reading all the posts on this thread, the moral of the story is: If you buy a Framed, you will upgrade a lot of parts. Good to know.


So are you implying that is a bad thing?

I thought this was a positive! A Framed bike is $500-$1000 cheaper than comparable bikes ( look at the component spec on a salsa Muk 3) so you'll have lots of money for the upgrades.

Bottom line is owners of these bikes love them! Who cares what upgrades they do?


----------



## linklight (Mar 9, 2014)

Barheet said:


> Wow so after reading all the posts on this thread, the moral of the story is: If you buy a Framed, you will upgrade a lot of parts. Good to know.


I was impressed with how the Minnesota was spec'd. It uses standard parts and components so you can upgrade or you can ride stock. I see that as a plus.

I bought a Mongoose Beast because it was $200. I spent $150 upgrading it but I wasn't happy with the bike so I sold it for $50. The BB, spindle, rear hub and axle are not standard parts hence if you need to replace those parts, you will need to spend $200 for another bike to pull parts off of.

I also have a Trek 29er full suspension mountain bike but since I bought the Minnesota 2.0, the Trek hasn't gotten any trail time. I've ridden the Minnesota on the beach, snow, slush, mud, gravel, and dirt trails and it's a blast - it rolls over everything. The only surface I couldn't ride on was ice. Took a huge spill on the ice - felt like somebody body slammed me on concrete.


----------



## Barheet (Jul 13, 2012)

Most people who comment and post pictures have a minimum of a few hundred dollars worth of upgrades on their bikes. I don't see many people posting how much they love their stock Framed bikes. It's just an observation.

Believe me, I WANT to like these bikes. I mean, you can get one on Amazon. How easy is that?


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

My Minnesota is completely stock, I added a bottle cage and changed the small chain ring to a 24t, the bike works perfect, if you want more, you have to pay for more. I don't see any point in spending $800 on upgrades when that puts the bike on the same price point as a fatboy. I do plan on upgrading the tires, but that is required on all sub $1500 bikes.


----------



## PerraHunter (Nov 3, 2013)

Barheet said:


> Wow so after reading all the posts on this thread, the moral of the story is: If you buy a Framed, you will upgrade a lot of parts. Good to know.


Well, no. The people who post the most do so because they have something to brag about, and justifiably so. I think the majority of riders are keeping the bike pretty much stock. Changing seat, stem and handlebar and peddles is done for fit and comfort, although some people "upgrade" these components at the same time. I have far more money in new tools than I have in stuff to put on the bike (the new tools are more for my older bikes anyway).

Here is the bottom line; this bike is perfectly rideable, after assembly, right out of the box. Any "upgrading" you do is purely optional. I'd say, get the bike and ride it for 100 miles before buying new stuff.


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

Mine is basically stock. I wanted to change the stem, but I decided to ride it a bit as is. After maybe 80-100 miles, I decided to leave the stem. I don't like the stem (riding position) when cruising around town or gavel roads, but on the tight trails it seems about right. I am going to change the grips to some type of ergo grips, but the other stuff will remain stock until I break it or wear a part out. Someday I will put on some orange pedals, grips and cables! New tires and maybe brakes later. The gearing and tires are ok for me being in relatively flat, tight terrain.

Take care,

Mike


----------



## Barheet (Jul 13, 2012)

Good to hear from you guys riding stock. Thanks for the input!


----------



## trojan9x (Dec 5, 2005)

Got some rebadged Minnesota's on Ebay now.

New SRAM Groupset 18 Speed Beach Cruiser 19" Fat Tire Bike Fatboy Snow Bicycle | eBay


----------



## trojan9x (Dec 5, 2005)

Curious if anyone has ridden both the 2.0 and the On-One Fatty if you could compare the two.


----------



## tartosuc (May 18, 2006)

So almost all of you got the 2.0.
Anyone riding the 1.0? I,m interrested in that one for two reason.
-the longer top tube, all my bikes have long tt and shrt stem
- i see as a base to put the bunch good components i have in my parts bin.


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

tartosuc said:


> the longer top tube, all my bikes have long tt and short stem


I actually found the shorted top tube better shifts your weight back and gives better traction when climbing.


----------



## rdub315 (Apr 14, 2014)

If anyone is waiting on the Minnesota 2.0, The House tells me that they will be in stock on the 28th. 

I'm trying to decide between the 2.0, the Nashbar Big Ol' (out of stock until July?), the Motobecane FB4 Elite, or waiting until something new comes out that catches my eye.


----------



## AdamJay (Jan 27, 2014)

rdub315 said:


> I'm trying to decide between the 2.0, the Nashbar Big Ol' (out of stock until July?), the Motobecane FB4 Elite, or waiting until something new comes out that catches my eye.


I'm an FB4 Elite owner since February. The only real pitfall with this bike is the heavy double wall weinmann rims. They are overkill, especially the 100mm up front which is the hardest rim I've ever had to mount and unmount tires on (and I've tried 4 different tires, all a pain). I built a second wheelset and will be scrapping the double wall 100mm hoop for a single wall 80mm.

That said, the hubs are sealed cartridge bearing and roll well. The shifters and mechs are solid (though I swapped my rear with a $60 XT). It's a great bike save for the rims. 
At times I have thought going with the Boris X9 would have been better, but I wanted hydro brakes and Shimano components. In the end, getting the bike I wanted, an Elite with lighter rims, wasn't much less than a used Pugsley. However the cost of entry was low and it have been able to upgrade and modify as I go.

One other thing to conseider with the FB4 and SE Fat bikes, the frame utilizes an odd 21.5mm rear offset. Any good wheel builder can work with this, but you won't find any off-the-shelf rear wheels for these bikes. As the joy of a fat bike is largely dependent on the rubber, I recommend owning an extra wheelset if one can afford it. The off offset size adds a small hurdle to that.


----------



## fatbones (Apr 23, 2014)

trojan9x said:


> Curious if anyone has ridden both the 2.0 and the On-One Fatty if you could compare the two.


I was wondering the same thing. I know the 16" frame geometry is very close and probably the others, too. I'm trying to decide whether to get a 2.0 or build Fatty to my liking. Everything is pointing to the 2.0 because of price and most of the parts I have lying around are old and incompatible that would make a build too costly in comparison.


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Barheet said:


> Good to hear from you guys riding stock. Thanks for the input!


I usually build my bikes frame up, but there are so many fat bike specific parts that it's really pricey to do it that way. I consider mine fairly stock, and the first few rides it was bone stock. Switching out cockpit parts is pretty common as everyone has their own riding style/body type to accommodate, and I had stuff in the parts bin for that. Lighter tubes are a cheap and easy upgrade, and even the big name bikes come with heavy stock ones. The stock fork was fine, the only reason I replaced it with carbon was to give better shock absorbtion when riding with the 29er wheels. Weight savings was a bonus. Drive train and brakes are middle of the road, and actually work well when adjusted correctly. If you have better stuff lying around it's worth the immediate upgrade, but I plan to wait until it starts wearing out. I didn't find the gearing to be an issue for trail riding or climbing, but I usually ride a singlespeed, so take that with a grain of salt. Most companies will skimp on spec somewhere to meet a pricepoint, and spend money elsewhere in the build. I nice fork and rear derailleur usually means a cheap front der and house brand cockpit. Still have the Missions, but no MTB tire is perfect for every condition.

Short answer, it's great out of the box, so ride and enjoy. If you want to upgrade down the line, the frame is worthy.


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

I know the On-One fork is steel, is the frame?


----------



## fatbones (Apr 23, 2014)

The frame is aluminum.


----------



## Slow Danger (Oct 9, 2009)

2LO4U2C said:


> I know the On-One fork is steel, is the frame?


And that On-one fork is carbon.


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Correct. The one that comes with the frame/bike is a steel fork, I have their aftermarket carbon. Note, the disk spacing for the On-One fork is different than on the MN, So don't get it unless you are getting new wheels/hubs or are ready to do some engineering on the brake mount.


----------



## kenlanham (Mar 10, 2010)

*Sizing?*

I'm on the shorter side, and wondering if the 16" or 18" would be better for me. I ride 17.5" hardtail 29er, and usually a 53/54cm road or CX bike. I'm about 5'7". Anyone have any feedback regarding the 16 Minnesota 2.0"? I don't like a cramped short top tube on my bikes, so leaning toward the 18". But without a place to test ride, I'm not sure if that would be way too big for me.


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

I am 5' 10" and the 18" was too small for my liking. Ended up buying an adjustable stem to increase the reach. If I could order again I would go with the 20" (or 19" and buy the 1.0). So, my advice would be the 18" if you don't like being cramped.


----------



## trojan9x (Dec 5, 2005)

The 2.0 has a shorter top tube than the 1.0. If you don't like short top tubes, I would go with the 1.0


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

Has anyone tried any 29+ tires on the 29" rims that came with the Minnesota 2.0? Are the rims wide enough to handle 29+ tires? When measuring rim width, do you measure the inside width?

Thanks for your help!

Mike


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

*Thanks! Framed 2.0 ordered today.*

Thanks to the folks who posted their impressions -- the good, the bad and the ugly -- of the Framed 2.0 fat bike.

On the strength of your comments and my research I ordered one today -- with the additional wheelset -- from The House. Silver/red 18".

Though most of the snow except the really high stuff has already melted here in NW Montana, there won't be any shortage of fire trails and logging roads to ride for the rest of the summer, and I'm looking forward to extending my riding season well into the winter.

Steve


----------



## trojan9x (Dec 5, 2005)

oldmustang said:


> Thanks to the folks who posted their impressions -- the good, the bad and the ugly -- of the Framed 2.0 fat bike.
> 
> On the strength of your comments and my research I ordered one today -- with the additional wheelset -- from The House. Silver/red 18".
> 
> ...


Good luck with it


----------



## Mr. Doom (Sep 23, 2005)

You are going to love your fatty, I just hit the singletrack on my Moto FB4 and had a blast. The Yelli screamy is going to be getting a break for a while.


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

*Thanks! Framed 2.0 ordered today.*



Mr. Doom said:


> You are going to love your fatty, I just hit the singletrack on my Moto FB4 and had a blast. The Yelli screamy is going to be getting a break for a while.


Thanks for the kind words. Though I'm going to try to hold off on immediately rebuilding and customizing the 2.0 until I get some miles on it, one thing I did order was the Race Face 22/32 chainring/bashring set:

Race Face 9 Speed Ring and Bash Set > Components > Drivetrain > Chainrings | Jenson USA Online Bike Shop

One thing we have no shortage of in NW Montana is hills. Old fat guy on a new fat bike needs some low range!

Steve

Montana -- too small to be a country, too large to be an asylum.


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

Shipping notice from The House -- my Framed 2.0 should be here tomorrow!

I'm stoked!

Steve


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

My wife called me from home to let me know two big boxes were dropped off by FEDEX.

I think I feel a sick day coming on. . .

Yep.

Steve Z


----------



## trojan9x (Dec 5, 2005)

This just in... "your are seeing a 3.0. Framed Bikes is out testing with their Euro team riders up in Duluth this week!" 

This was in response to a facebook post from the house boardshop.


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

*More fun than skinny-dippin'!*

Just a brief note before heading to work to post my impressions of My New Bike (silver/red 18" Framed 2.0).

I'd of posted sooner, but when I got home last night the first thing I had to do was tear open the boxes and put the new fattie together. Then, I had to take it for a spin. One thing led to another and pretty soon it was dark. So back home for a bite of supper before bed. 0330 comes too early in the morning on a work day.

I'm a sixty-something fat guy who's been mostly road biking since I was in knee pants, and this is the most fun I've on two wheels since that time back in college when a bunch of us decided to go co-ed skinny dipping by jumping our bikes buckass naked off the top of the local stone quarry. Hey, it was the sixties!

I've got to hand it to Framed, the 2.0 is a great value in a fat bike. It comes in hundreds less than the popular competition and yet there isn't anything out of the box that needs to be replaced right away or that seems like a throw-away to meet a price point. Yeah there are more expensive bikes and components out there, but they're just that, more expensive, and from what I've seen the nearest competitors don't offer any better fit, finish or component level.

The upscale fat-bike crowd should be very upset over what they've paid for their bikes. The quality of the 2.0 frame definitely justifies upgrading later down the road if a person's interests are in that direction.

Did I mention fun? (I repeat myself as I grow older). I really about a sick day today when the alarm clock went off. Great fun and I know I'm going for a long ride after work again tonight. In fact, my whole weekend just planned itself and I've got a summer of single track I want to take the 2.0 on.

Ride quality is plenty plush with the big meats, handling is still pretty quick with the tight frame geometry, and the closer cockpit dimensions are comfortable without feeling like I'm out over the front tire too much. I found the right seat height and handlebar tilt pretty quickly and only had to touch up the tilt on the shifters a bit. Didn't miss the clip-in pedals as much as I thought I might. Brakes and derailleurs were spot on out of the box. Nice. The provided saddle is actually pretty comfortable. Firm without too much squish.

Only quibble so far -- the hand-grips are fairly thin and I felt them moving around on the bar when I really started pulling. But hey, I've got to customize something. Maybe some nice tri-color rasta grips.

I'm not sure when I'm going to find the time to try out the spare wheelset, but it was nice Framed included it. Basic but certainly not grim. Nice value that they include rotors and a cog-set. Maybe I'll put them on for the ride to town to avoid any temptation for the townies to steal my fat tires and rims. Rough crowd up here in NW Montana.

I've already had people stopping their trucks and asking me all about it or giving me the thumbs-up as they drive slowly by -- everybody's been commenting on those awesome skins. I.m definitely going to have to lock this baby up at the store!

Got to fly now, but didn't want to wait any longer to post about how happy I am with my new bike. It's just like finding that first one under the Christmas tree over 50 years ago.

Steve Z


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

So I guess everybody must be out riding their bikes.

Hello? Hello?

Well, I've been riding mine a lot too. Still love it!

Steve Z


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

Mine has been parked for the past couple months, no snow = no fatbiking. Maybe I should try it out on some of them trails.


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

That's what I've been doing -- hitting the trails and even some XC jaunts across clear-cuts and old burns up in the National forest. Two days ago I visited the Blue Mountain lookout tower (sorry, no pictures yet -- I don't have enough posts):

Kootenai National Forest - Yaak Mountain Lookout

Most of my rides could have been done on a regular mountain bike -- except some of the pathless xc bits maybe -- but it sure was a lot of fun on the fat bike. I noticed I can keep my head up and actually enjoy the larger picture of where I am riding rather than keeping the focus on the trail and picking my way around.

I know I'm a lot slower on the way up on my fat bike than with a skinny-tire bike, but that's not why I'm riding anyway. And I can get my adrenline going just fine on the way back down!

Steve

Steve Z


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

Oh darn, that link was to the lookout on Yaak Mountain. Didn't see that until I posted. Guess I'll have to ride to that one now, too. 8^)

Oh well, they're all pretty similar -- they're rustic, up on the top of a tower, and smack-dab on top of a mountain. Great views, it goes without saying. Many of them are for rent for the night out here, too. You haven't lived until you've had your morning cup of coffee with the sun just starting to peek over the mountains to the east.

Steve Z


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

Well, good news -- my wife informs me she definitely wants a fat-bike, too. Seems like there's a 16.0 frame-size Minnesota in our future.

Anyone heard more about the rumored 3.0?

Thanks!

Steve Z


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I haven't heard anything more on the 3.0. All that was shown was that picture on Facebook.


----------



## zombinate (Apr 27, 2009)

I saw the prototype Framed carbon frame with Bluto fork out on the trails last week. It was pretty sexy. Dude was saying sometime this fall. Approx $2500


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

zombinate said:


> I saw the prototype Framed carbon frame with Bluto fork out on the trails last week. It was pretty sexy. Dude was saying sometime this fall. Approx $2500


zombinate, was this the bike?

Exclusive: 'Top-Secret' Carbon Fat Bike | Gear Review | Gear Junkie









And this could possibly be the 3.0 without front suspension and Alloy frame????


----------



## zombinate (Apr 27, 2009)

can't say for sure, but the colors are right


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

Got the shipping notification from The House that my wife's black/white `6-inch 2.0 is on the way and should be here tomorrow. I don't know who is more excited -- her or me. I'm looking forward to sharing with her all the fun I've been having on my 2.0.

Steve Z


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

Maybe somebody can help me out here, but the main differences I'm seeing between the 1.0 and 2.0 would be the lack of a deraileur on the 1.0. Then maybe slight parts differences. Am I missing something. I really like the red 1.0, and I really don't like the colors for the 2.0s. (maybe I have something against colored rims? ha)

That said, will I miss the second front cog (snow and trail)? If so, given the low price of the 1.0, how much would it be to add a second?


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

tyriverag

The 1.0 and 2.0 also have a different geometry.

The 2.0 has a mounting block welded to mount the front derailleur. The 1.0 doesn't have that block so mounting a front derailleur might be a bit more challenging. I believe Problem Solver and a few other manufacturers make a mount that might work to allow you to mount a front derailleur.

The mounting block is shown in the picture bellow









I bought the 2.0 and actually converted it to a 1x10 setup with a Raceface Narrow Wide Chainring in the front. It's been a great setup.

As for colored rim, you can order the 2.0 in all black

On Sale Framed Minnesota 2.0 Fat Bike Black 2014


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

oldmustang said:


> Got the shipping notification from The House that my wife's black/white `6-inch 2.0 is on the way and should be here tomorrow. I don't know who is more excited -- her or me. I'm looking forward to sharing with her all the fun I've been having on my 2.0.
> 
> Steve Z


I got my wife a 16" 2.0 and she loves it. She pumps the missions way up for riding around the lakes with the kiddos. But the rad thing is she's a lot more confident when I take her to ride single track...the 4" stability helps.

I just got her a women's saddle and cut the bars a touch.


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

Thanks Kawidan, I must have missed the all black 2.0. Hopefully one of these weekends I'll shoot over to the cities to check them both out. 

Bonus confession: my birthday is coming up and my wife said she thought about it and wants to buy me a fatbike, with a $2k budget. This might get me banned from here, but I told her I would rather have kayaks or SUPs, for us to use.


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

mncyclist said:


> I got my wife a 16" 2.0 and she loves it. She pumps the missions way up for riding around the lakes with the kiddos. But the rad thing is she's a lot more confident when I take her to ride single track...the 4" stability helps.
> 
> I just got her a women's saddle and cut the bars a touch.


My wife felt the same way when she borrowed mine -- very secure and she enjoyed the comfort that the fat tires provided, even pumped up. Like having suspension she said.

We're planning similar mods right off the bat -- women's saddle, or at least something wider from the spares (I've got a never been mounted brown Brooks B17N, but that might still be too narrow) and different bars. We're going the swept-back route. On One Mary bars if we can find them, or maybe Soma's Clarence bars.

Cheers,

Steve Z


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

Hi, I am a Minnesotan and just started biking last year at age 54 and am now doing 50-60 miles a week. Love my Giant Escape Hybrid.

Now, I really missed riding during the winter so am considering a fat bike and there seem to be a lot of sales now. So was investigating a Surly Pugsley/Special Ops, Salsa Mukluk 2 or even a Surly Moonlander when I happened on this thread last night.

This bike sounds almost too good to be true, but on the other hand, sound like savings might get eaten up by upgrades. Here's the thing, I'm no bike mechanic and it needs to perform in snow; while the extra tire set is a nice addition - it must be a good winter bike. Snow is it's number one mission. I plan on going over to the St. Paul store for a test...but would appreciate any opinions...


So, as a Minnesotan, will I be happy with a Minnesota 2.0?


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

For just a snow machine I'd wait to see what tires they have on the 2015 lineup. I don't mind the Vee Missions in snow but I ride a lot of packed/groomed trails. You may want to see what the whole MN 3.0 looks like...I'm guessing bigger tires


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

Thanks mncyclist...

I live in Hopkins/Minnetonka area and will probably be on trails and frozen lakes mostly...is that the kind of packed snow you are referring to?


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

Fellow Twin Cities rider / Minnesota 2.0 owner here... I agree that you should wait until this fall to pull the trigger since snow is your priority. I think you'll see some great new 2015 models introduced and parts upgraded / prices lowered on existing fat bikes as there is finally competition in the Fat bike market. The 2014 bikes will only get put on deeper discount as the summer goes on.

Having gone through this process last year, I would plan on needing two sets of tires, one for winter and one for summer. You'll figure out quickly that riding on dirt with your fat bike is just as fun as snow! That being said, buy the bike that fits you the best and don't make a decision based on the stock tires that comes with the bike since I can almost guarantee you'll buy a 2nd set.

Finally, There seems to be two types of geometries on Fat Bikes, those for long haul adventures like the Mukluk, Moonlander and Pugsley and those intended to be ridden on single track like the Minnesota 2.0, Trek Farley and Specialized Fat Boy with shorter top tube and more "trail" oriented geometry. One isn't better than the other, all about preference. If I had $2k to spend on a Fat Bike I'd buy a Specialized Fat Boy for sure, but since I only had $1k last winter I went with the Minnesota 2.0 and treated myself to about $450 in upgrades (including $300 in tires with a Surly Bud & Nate), and have zero regrets.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

zaxmalloy said:


> Hi, I am a Minnesotan and just started biking last year at age 54 and am now doing 50-60 miles a week. Love my Giant Escape Hybrid.
> 
> Now, I really missed riding during the winter so am considering a fat bike and there seem to be a lot of sales now. So was investigating a Surly Pugsley/Special Ops, Salsa Mukluk 2 or even a Surly Moonlander when I happened on this thread last night.
> 
> ...


The bike works great stock. The Mission tires aren't the best in the snow, but I was still able put in a lot of snow miles and not all on groomed trails. Even spending some money on tires, it's still a great deal. The main reason I made upgrades is that I ride it pretty hard on singletrack, not just in the snow. My first few months with the bike I was riding unplowed rail/trail with 6-8 inches of snow.


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

Great input on any number of fronts. Very helpful...sounds like I should plan on this taking some time and not worry too much about sale prices or stock tires.

You talk about two different kinds of fat bikes, one for trails and another for long hauls. As I stated before, I haven't tried single track or riding in the woods, etc. but I'd like to...but mainly think my typical kind of ride will be on trails as the Lake Minnetonka LRT gravel trail which goes right by my house and so don't need a rack to take the bike somewhere. The LRT trail connects to other gravel or paved trails like Cedar Lake and the Midtown Greenway. Is that considered a long haul? Are the trails groomed/plowed trail in the winter? If so is a typical 15-20 mile round trip going to be comfortable on a Minnesota 2.0? 

Too many questions?


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

Very helpful to know. Wonder why so much of this thread talks to under-performance in the snow...your pictures show pretty typical conditions...wouldn't just about any bike would struggle with mega-snow...


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

I have no problem with longer hauls on the 2.0 but I do feel the shorter TT when riding trail...which I like. I've heard an MN 2.0 owner say the bike rewards aggressive riding and I'd agree with that. I don't ride my full suspension bike anymore, on single track I only ride fat. I'd say the Missions are fine (especially the 120TPIs) and for most winter days they'll work great. But there may be a few days you'd really wish you had Nates or Snowshoe XL's.


----------



## Penetrator (May 20, 2012)

Possible to make Minnesota 2.0 29 +?


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

zaxmalloy said:


> Very helpful to know. Wonder why so much of this thread talks to under-performance in the snow...your pictures show pretty typical conditions...wouldn't just about any bike would struggle with mega-snow...


I'll agree with "mncyclist" that it is entirely possible to ride the stock missions in the snow, but know they are a summer tire and sold as such. I actually really like the missions for riding on dirt, really low rolling resistance and solid cornering ability. That all said, after you've ridden a tire built for snow (like a Surly Nate), you'll realize how bad the Missions are, especially the front wheel washing out on corners gets frustrating quickly. I'm thankful Framed included summer tires because I think winter tires are a preference depending on location. Also, winter tires are expensive ($150 each) so you won't want to wear them down on the dirt. Just trust me when I say you'll want summer & winter tires to optimize your fat bike experience, there is no year around miracle tire (yet!).

Regarding the Geometry discussion of "trail" vs. trekking, it really comes down to preference. I only ride our local single track trails in summer and winter so the MN 2.0 was a perfect choice. Try test riding a Pugsley and a MN 2.0 back to back on the same day and you'll understand what we are talking about.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

Thanks mn_biker. This is making more sense. I didn't fully understand there was a specific distinction between summer and winter tires for fat bikes (though did realize that some highlighted winter use just by their name like "Snowshoe".) Shows what a noob I am I guess...

Sounds a bit like the distinction on cars between what are called an all weather tires and winter tires.


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

zaxmalloy said:


> Thanks mn_biker. This is making more sense. I didn't fully understand there was a specific distinction between summer and winter tires for fat bikes (though did realize that some highlighted winter use just by their name like "Snowshoe".) Shows what a noob I am I guess...
> 
> Sounds a bit like the distinction on cars between what are called an all weather tires and winter tires.


I've only had my 2.0 for a couple of weeks and my wife's isn't even a week old, so I can't speak to its prowess -- or mine -- on snow, but it has been a gas riding everything from back roads, logging and fire trails, and single-track, even no-track up in some of the clear-cuts around here in NW Montana. The bonus set of 29er wheels/tires/rotors is nice for quick trips to town, but half the time I've just left the fat tires on.

I've been biking for over forty years and built my share of rides from the frame up. Right out of the box I'd say there is really nothing that *needs* to be upgraded -- its more a matter of personal preference to enhance comfort and fit, riding style, and one's notion of how a proper bike should be outfitted. If you look at the component list for the other entry-level fat-bikes, including some that come in close to $1K higher, you won't see much difference. They all feature decent, mid-level brakes, derailleurs, an economy saddle, low-end headset and bars. To dramatically improve on the quality of the hubs, wheels and tires or save significant rotating weight you could easily sink the price of another 2.0 into building a flash wheelset. Plenty of threads around here about doing just that.

The only changes we're planning to make to our 2.0s are purely personal-preference things -- saddles, some On-One Mary bars, SRAM twist shifters. I'm definitely going to wait until much closer to winter before I consider changing the fat tires for something more aggressive. From what I've seen and heard Maxxis and Panaracer are going to be introducing some decent fat-tires and hopefully bring some fat-bike competition to tires. The current pricing of Surly tires only reflects short supply and high demand.

You've gotten some excellent advice so far, and since you're in a big city absolutely take advantage of riding a variety of the fat-bikes out there. If the geometry doesn't fit you, there's only so much changing handlebars, stems and saddles is going to do for you and ultimately you won't be happy no matter what you do or how much money you spend. My assessment so far is that the quality of the 2.0 frame will justify even some very serious upgrading should you decide to go that way, but maybe you want to ride whatever you decide on for a season before spending the big bucks.

Good luck!

Steve Z


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

Bonus...The House stocks Pugs, Moonlanders, SE Fat Bikes, Origin8, MN 1.0 and 2.0s. You should be able to get a feel without going all over town.


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

oldmustang said:


> I've only had my 2.0 for a couple of weeks and my wife's isn't even a week old, so I can't speak to its prowess -- or mine -- on snow, but it has been a gas riding everything from back roads, logging and fire trails, and single-track, even no-track up in some of the clear-cuts around here in NW Montana. The bonus set of 29er wheels/tires/rotors is nice for quick trips to town, but half the time I've just left the fat tires on.
> 
> I've been biking for over forty years and built my share of rides from the frame up. Right out of the box I'd say there is really nothing that *needs* to be upgraded -- its more a matter of personal preference to enhance comfort and fit, riding style, and one's notion of how a proper bike should be outfitted. If you look at the component list for the other entry-level fat-bikes, including some that come in close to $1K higher, you won't see much difference. They all feature decent, mid-level brakes, derailleurs, an economy saddle, low-end headset and bars. To dramatically improve on the quality of the hubs, wheels and tires or save significant rotating weight you could easily sink the price of another 2.0 into building a flash wheelset. Plenty of threads around here about doing just that.
> 
> ...


Lots of good stuff there...I read your posts and it sounded like you were about my age and this ting was making you smile like a kid. Glad to hear you have no purchase regrets. Understanding the tire issue ever better now.

The rest sounds like a matter of personal comfort, style and taste. Guess I won't be able to tell any of that until I actually do some riding on one besides my short tests on the Surly Pug Spcial Ops and Moonlander both of which were a gas but was restricted to parking lot and a hill). Would like to patronize the local shop but they don't carry the Minnesota...


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

They are about 30 miles from me so getting over there isn't a piece of cake but will try and get there sooner rather than later. Listening hard to those advising still that I should be patient and watch sale prices as 2015 models get closer/come out...I sure am anxious to scratch the itch though....


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

Glad to be of some help. You're right, absolutely no buyer's remorse with the 2.0 so far. I did some riding today and still had the smile on my face. One of my neighbors hollered, "Like your tires!" as I rode down to the river. Me too!

I envy folks who are closer to a big city who have the resources to try a variety of whatever they're looking for before buying. I'm about 160 miles from Spokane WA and a good 90 miles from Kalispell MT. Then again, I wouldn't trade being surrounded by National Forest and five miles from a Wilderness Area, living right on a blue-ribbon trout river, for traffic, suburbia, or convenience stores.

I wonder if fat-bikes follow the conventional bike store sales pattern -- moving out the old models in the fall to make way for ski equipment and next year's new bikes? Prime riding season for fat-bikes in the northern tier has been marketed as winter, though many people have fun riding them year-round. 

It's a good question -- do you save some money or have a better choice waiting for new models to be introduced and old models to go on sale, but give up a big chunk prime riding season? Assuming the fat-bike will be your primary ride. If you've got another bike then I guess that isn't a big deal.

Have a great time shopping and comparing, and let us know what you decide on even if it turns out not to be a Minnesota 2.0.

Steve Z


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

oldmustang said:


> Glad to be of some help. You're right, absolutely no buyer's remorse with the 2.0 so far. I did some riding today and still had the smile on my face. One of my neighbors hollered, "Like your tires!" as I rode down to the river. Me too!
> 
> I envy folks who are closer to a big city who have the resources to try a variety of whatever they're looking for before buying. I'm about 160 miles from Spokane WA and a good 90 miles from Kalispell MT. Then again, I wouldn't trade being surrounded by National Forest and five miles from a Wilderness Area, living right on a blue-ribbon trout river, for traffic, suburbia, or convenience stores.
> 
> ...


Your insight and others here have been a great help. Sounds like I should be patient and wait for 2015 model introductions, both for the Minnesota 3.0 and others as it will drive down prices on 2014 models and/or offer more choice...sounds like fat bikes are still a relatively new concept so each year they are getting better and more inexpensive as it becomes less of a 'boutique' offering and more mainstream.

Since I am out of town much of July on vacation and business this probably makes even more sense. In the meantime, I am doing as much research as I can and I'll continue to test. Maybe rent a fat bike for a day from a local shop.


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

*Minnesota 3.0 vs 2.0 and 1.0*



zaxmalloy said:


> Your insight and others here have been a great help. Sounds like I should be patient and wait for 2015 model introductions, both for the Minnesota 3.0 and others as it will drive down prices on 2014 models and/or offer more choice...sounds like fat bikes are still a relatively new concept so each year they are getting better and more inexpensive as it becomes less of a 'boutique' offering and more mainstream.
> 
> Just a point of clarification -- the rumored-soon-to-be-announced Minnesota 3.0 is a carbon fiber fat bike and will probably come to retail at around $2500. As such it probably won't exert much downward pressure on the existing 1.0 and 2.0 prices, which are marketed as entry-level basic fat-bikes. Two different market segments.
> 
> ...


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

Wow - okay, that's more information than i found anywhere else on the 3.0.

At this point I'm actually not concerned about what I spend on the bike as much as I am with having a good winter riding solution: bike, gear, etc all in with a minimum of wrenching. Spending for a Surly Pug (love the special ops version) or Salsa Mukluk 2 something really limited the amount i had to spend on all the other gear needed for winter riding.


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

zaxmalloy said:


> Wow - okay, that's more information than i found anywhere else on the 3.0.
> 
> At this point I'm actually not concerned about what I spend on the bike as much as I am with having a good winter riding solution: bike, gear, etc all in with a minimum of wrenching. Spending for a Surly Pug (love the special ops version) or Salsa Mukluk 2 something really limited the amount i had to spend on all the other gear needed for winter riding.


There's a thread in the fat bike forum about the 3.0 not very intuitively titled:

The $2500 Carbon Fat Bike with Bluto Fork. Sign me up

It sounded to me like at least one member with industry ties has ridden the prototype already.

Steve Z


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

oldmustang said:


> There's a thread in the fat bike forum about the 3.0 not very intuitively titled:
> 
> The $2500 Carbon Fat Bike with Bluto Fork. Sign me up
> 
> ...


The 3.0 won't be the Carbon version. From what I've been told and the pictures I've seen, Framed Bikes will have several new models for 2015 including the Aluminum 3.0, the Carbon, and several other interesting models.

If you look at this picture, you can clearly see the Alloy writing on the chainstay.


----------



## oldmustang (May 27, 2014)

Thanks for the correction. I don't want to be one to spread bum dope.

Steve Z


----------



## adw31 (Feb 16, 2014)

Anybody know if the front hubs on the 1.0 or 2.0 are rear disc spaced or front. Thinking about ordering set of the wheels from the house.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

adw31 said:


> Anybody know if the front hubs on the 1.0 or 2.0 are rear disc spaced or front. Thinking about ordering set of the wheels from the house.


They are definitely front spaced like a regular 135mm hub.


----------



## SRock24 (Mar 10, 2012)

tyriverag said:


> Bonus confession: my birthday is coming up and my wife said she thought about it and wants to buy me a fatbike, with a $2k budget. This might get me banned from here, but I told her I would rather have kayaks or SUPs, for us to use.


that is a sin but a smart marriage move (wife happy = everyone happy)... Fatties are fun though....


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

I have liked my 2.0 a lot so far. I spent the winter mountain biking with it on our wonderfully maintained trail system in the Twin Cities. I didn't HATE the mission tires, and if I aired the front to 5 and the rear to 6 psi, I thought they gripped fine. I've enjoyed it enough , I may sell my 2.0 to get a carbon borealis. The minnesota 2.0 is a far better bike than the price suggests. I put a 22/32 chainring on mine, a traditional mtb riser bar and Hayes stroker trail brakes on mine to make it more my style, but stock it would have been fine!


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

Well, procrastination got the best of me. I was on a nice road/MUP ride when I felt my rear tire going flat. I was about a mile from where I work, so I tried to limp it in...didn't make it. I had to walk for the last 1/4 mile or so. Got into the shade of our parking garage and took it apart. Here is a pic of my "work area" I had to repair the bike.


I found the hole and decided to patch it. Patch glue was too old and had solidified. I had a spare tube, so I slapped it in and went to inflate. When I went to grab a couple of CO2 canisters...they weren't there. Either they fell out of the bag or I removed them and forgot to replace them. Either way, it was time to test out the frame pump. While it was slow progress and a workout...the Lezyne HV pump worked wonderfully. I slapped it back together and finished my ride. Totaled out at a little over 19 miles. My road bike is starting to get pissed over this whole fatbike thing!

Has anyone on here done split tube on this bike yet? I already have the extra tubes and the Stans...just haven't gotten around to it yet.

Galen


----------



## Stormwalker (Feb 23, 2011)

Edit: On second thought, I probably shouldn't post all that detailed stuff I posted because I didn't really get permission to do so from who I talked to tonight. I'll just leave my fuzzy crappy cell phone picture up and say the Alaskan is going to be pretty sweet!


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

Snopro440 said:


> I have liked my 2.0 a lot so far. I spent the winter mountain biking with it on our wonderfully maintained trail system in the Twin Cities. I didn't HATE the mission tires, and if I aired the front to 5 and the rear to 6 psi, I thought they gripped fine. I've enjoyed it enough , I may sell my 2.0 to get a carbon borealeas. The minnesota 2.0 is a far better bike than the price suggests. I put a 22/32 chainring on mine, a traditional mtb riser bar and Hayes stroker trail brakes on mine to make it more my style, but stock it would have been fine!


You are using the bike exactly as I'd intend....winter trails in the Twin Cities. Need to test one soon.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

zaxmalloy said:


> You are using the bike exactly as I'd intend....winter trails in the Twin Cities. Need to test one soon.


If you ever get up to Elm Creek or to Elk River to ride the trails, I would be happy to meet you and lend you mine. Its a 20", so you would probably need to be 6 feet tall or taller to fit tho.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

A couple of teasers of the 2015.


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

Snopro440 said:


> If you ever get up to Elm Creek or to Elk River to ride the trails, I would be happy to meet you and lend you mine. Its a 20", so you would probably need to be 6 feet tall or taller to fit tho.


Wow- what a considerate and kind offer- thanks!

I am 6'1", 32" inseam. My Giant Escape Hybrid Bike is an L. I'm in Minnetonka and do appreciate your offer but have never gotten up that way to ride. Since the place in St.Paul has them thinking I'll probably head over there but if I find the opportunity to take you up on your offer just might....


----------



## Harold (Dec 23, 2003)

Just saw a Minnesota 2.0 in the shop yesterday. Dude couldn't figure out why his left pedal wouldn't thread on. Turned out, even though it was marked a left pedal, it was threaded for the right side. Doh!

Otherwise, the bike looked pretty good.


----------



## beachbum1 (Oct 2, 2012)

Here's a question: Can you put a Bluto fork on the Minnesota 2 or would you have to get a new front wheel? If that's the case, I guess it would make more sense to hold off and see what this carbon fatty from Framed is all about.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

beachbum1 said:


> Here's a question: Can you put a Bluto fork on the Minnesota 2 or would you have to get a new front wheel? If that's the case, I guess it would make more sense to hold off and see what this carbon fatty from Framed is all about.


The Minnesota doesn't have a tapered headtube so it can't accommodate a Bluto. Plus the front wheel has a 135mm hub where as you need a 150mm hub for the Bluto. There is a guy on the Facebook Group who sells a spacer that allows you to run a Tappered Bluto Fork on a non tapered headtube, but you would still need a new hub for your front wheel


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

Actually the headset issue is east, several places make a lower headset that's just for the purpose of tapered ht on standard (integrated headset) frames.
Sent from my Nokia Stupid Phone using Tapatalk


----------



## MUSTCLIME (Jan 26, 2004)

tigris99 said:


> Actually the headset issue is east, several places make a lower headset that's just for the purpose of tapered ht on standard (integrated headset) frames.
> Sent from my Nokia Stupid Phone using Tapatalk


link? I have never seen those.


----------



## rjedoaks (Aug 10, 2009)

If your HS is 44 mm then yes. 1 1/8 no go


Pedaling


----------



## MUSTCLIME (Jan 26, 2004)

thats what I thought...I have seen the 44mm headset adapters but 1 1/8 is 28.something mm.

thanks


----------



## Kleebs (Mar 18, 2014)

What is the widest tire the Minny 2.0 can handle?


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

Kleebs said:


> What is the widest tire the Minny 2.0 can handle?


We are probably going to try a pair of Snowshoe tires on one. Looks like the rear will just clear but don't know if all gears will clear.


----------



## Medicius (Jun 17, 2014)

I'm quite excited. I just got my first new-to-me bike that _I've_ paid for (previous current was a present from 1993 - Trek 820 Antelope) and the current current is the MN2.0. I didn't get the color I wanted but the deal was too good to pass up (used and marked down).

I got to ride it for an hour in the lot and I didn't find anything obviously stand-out wrong with it. Though by the time I got home it was too dark to do any further checks with it.

Anyway, just wanted to post in this thread because I'm excited about the new bike.


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

Like many, I read lots and hear about all the bike options in the $2k plus range and think about upgrading, then I take my 2.0 out for a ride and wonder why, this bike is great! Just my opinion, from the stock build, all it needs is a 22t granny ring, better tires and BB7 brakes and it's good to go!

Happy Riding!


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

I adjusted my bb5's and they work really well. I had thought of replacing them with bb7's, but I'll keep the bb5's!! I agree the stock gearing is bad, and after going to 22/32, I was totally satisfied!!


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

I put a tapered Fox on my SE. It had an internal headset for 1 1/8, I popped out the bottom cup and replaced it with a Cane Creek external for the tapered steerer. I would think you can do the same on them MN.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

Kleebs said:


> What is the widest tire the Minny 2.0 can handle?


4.8 on the front and 3.8 in rear. There is zero chance a true 4.8 fits rear (I tried).

Some people have fit a 1st generation snowshoe on rear, though since it is not a true 4.8.

If you are looking for snow, just get a Nate.


----------



## Snopro440 (Mar 30, 2008)

Has anyone got a set of stock pedals that came on a 2.0 that they took off and aren't using? I'd be interested in buying a set. The House is out of stock with them.


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

Snopro440 said:


> Has anyone got a set of stock pedals that came on a 2.0 that they took off and aren't using? I'd be interested in buying a set. The House is out of stock with them.


You can have mine for a six pack, they were never used. PM me. I'll reply tomorrow.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

The first 2015 Fat Bike has been released from Framed Bikes.

Introducing the 2015 Minnesota 3.0 Fat Bike. More Sizes, More Upgrades, More Everything. Still at a killer price~PRE ORDERS COMING SOON! Please mop up after your done drooling...


----------



## MUSTCLIME (Jan 26, 2004)

Nice....waiting on price points...the new mongoose is looking good as well.


----------



## geffr999 (Jun 16, 2014)

Kawidan said:


> The first 2015 Fat Bike has been released from Framed Bikes.
> 
> Introducing the 2015 Minnesota 3.0 Fat Bike. More Sizes, More Upgrades, More Everything. Still at a killer price~PRE ORDERS COMING SOON! Please mop up after your done drooling...
> 
> View attachment 910365


that looks nice


----------



## SRock24 (Mar 10, 2012)

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know how much the Minnesota 2.0 frame weighs vs Surly Pugsley fame weight? Curious to compare it to a pugs frame weight, thinking about switching over to a Framed.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

I think the Minnesota Frame is about 2lbs lighter. A Stock 2.0 is 35lbs. I believe a Pugsley is around 37lbs.


----------



## SRock24 (Mar 10, 2012)

Kawidan said:


> I think the Minnesota Frame is about 2lbs lighter. A Stock 2.0 is 35lbs. I believe a Pugsley is around 37lbs.


thanks. Same build/components I'm assuming?


----------



## MUSTCLIME (Jan 26, 2004)

I don't think so......pugs does not have 170 spacing in the rear.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

The Minnesota 3.0 with Bluto will be $1,399. This price also includes a 3.0 rigid alloy fork (summer/winter). It should be available for pre-order at The House, look for an official launch in the next few days.


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Kawidan said:


> The Minnesota 3.0 with Bluto will be $1,399. This price also includes a 3.0 rigid alloy fork (summer/winter). It should be available for pre-order at The House, look for an official launch in the next few days.


Nice. Did they at least fix the gearing?


----------



## Roaming50 (Apr 30, 2009)

zorg said:


> Nice. Did they at least fix the gearing?


+1

If the gearing is fixed then this may be the bike for me.


----------



## zaxmalloy (Jun 23, 2014)

Fix the gearing? What was "wrong" with it?


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

I guess that I am the only one who actually likes the gearing on my 2.0. I ride mine on light trails, road and sand. For my purposes, the gearing is almost perfect. For trails, I don't need a lower gear, and on the road I only spin out on top end coming off one bridge. Strava had me going 28mph.

Galen


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

zaxmalloy said:


> Fix the gearing? What was "wrong" with it?


28/38 chainring is way too long in the mountains.


----------



## Roaming50 (Apr 30, 2009)

A 24/36 would be better or better yet a 22/36.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

3.0 is a 10spd...Front is 28/38 and rear is 11/36


----------



## zorg (Jul 1, 2004)

Not that I personally care, but I really don't get the reason for putting a 28 chainring on a fatbike. That just makes no sense whatsoever.


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

I rode my 2.0 2km, then changed out the 28t for a 24t, it's a slow bike and my legs are not that beefy. At least it's a little better than last years 11-34.


----------



## MUSTCLIME (Jan 26, 2004)

Can anyone with a 16 inch 2.0 bike give me a stand over hight? I seee that the 16inch is 31.5 inches....on this page

On Sale Framed Minnesota 2.0 Fat Bike Black/White 2014

I called and the person on the phone sounded drunk and just told me that I would fit....I am 5'6" and have a 29" inseam. I have had bikes that are to tall and do not want to repeat this.

Thanks


----------



## Kleebs (Mar 18, 2014)

mn_biker said:


> 4.8 on the front and 3.8 in rear. There is zero chance a true 4.8 fits rear (I tried).
> 
> Some people have fit a 1st generation snowshoe on rear, though since it is not a true 4.8.
> 
> If you are looking for snow, just get a Nate.


Thanks. I'm going to replace the Missions and am curious if some of the new 4.5 - 4.7 Vees will fit the rear. Looking at the Snowshoe, bulldozer, etc.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

I think the VEE H-Billie (4.25) will fit the rear of a 2.0.


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

I rode the 2.0 this last weekend, after riding a Fatboy, so that may have ruined it for me, at least a little bit ha.

It rode well, didn't hate the Missions, though I was mostly on pavement and grass. Bike was surprisingly light, probably lighter than my Rockhopper. The shifters seemed kind of cheap, brakes stopped me fine, but I think I could sense a lack of stopping power, compared to others. 

When I turned a little harder, the tires seemed to bite and I think I felt a little self steer, when they wanted to keep turning. Felt strange. Overall, at that price point, I think you're getting a great value. For a more casual/recreational rider like me, that's the way to go, that or BD. Living close to Minneapolis, I'd probably lean towards Framed, unless the Lurch gets glowing reviews.

Also, talked to the builder there and he let me get a sneak peek of the Alaskan Alloy, that's in the Alaskan thread.


----------



## Morej (Oct 18, 2011)

Is there anyone who converted the Minnesota to tubeless? How difficult was it? I looked at the rim strip, I guess it has to be trimmed. What about the inner holes on the rims?


----------



## Bumpyride (Jan 2, 2014)

MUSTCLIME said:


> Can anyone with a 16 inch 2.0 bike give me a stand over hight? I seee that the 16inch is 31.5 inches....on this page
> 
> On Sale Framed Minnesota 2.0 Fat Bike Black/White 2014
> 
> ...


This is exactly why I chose the Bikesdirect Boris X9. The standover height on the 15" is 26.2"

SRAM X9 2x10 Speed
Disc Brake Fat Bikes

Motobecane 2015
Boris X9
SALE $799.95 (List $2499) 
Ships Signature Req'd for your protection

Hydroformed Aluminum Frames
Avid BB7 Disk Brakes
Competition V-Rubber Tires
WTB Saddles

Size
General Fit Guide Rider Height Range* Effective Top Tube Length Standover*
Small 15" 
5'5" to 5'8" tall
23.0 inches
26.2 inches
Medium 17" 
5'8" to 6' tall
23.7 inches
28.5 inches
Large 19" 
6' to 6'3" tall
24.5 inches
30.1 inches
XLarge 21" 
6'3 to 6'7" tall
25.2 inches
31.3 inches

Standover height is the best that I've seen, and I really like my bike.


----------



## SRock24 (Mar 10, 2012)

Morej said:


> Is there anyone who converted the Minnesota to tubeless? How difficult was it? I looked at the rim strip, I guess it has to be trimmed. What about the inner holes on the rims?


I tried it 2 weeks ago. It didn't work with my experience. We did the gorilla tape method and it didn't want to seat properly/at all. We couldn't get the tire to inflate (have done dozens of conversions of Surly rims). I haven't tried the tube method which might work but didn't bother trying yet.


----------



## Morej (Oct 18, 2011)

I was thinking of doing the gorilla tape method but I noticed that when I took off the front tire it just fell off the rim when I deflated it. Didn't seem like it were seated at the first place. I changed the tire to a Vee 8 and put in a light tube. Inflated to 20 PSI, not even a slight sign of seating.


----------



## 2LO4U2C (Jun 9, 2011)

These bikes do not fit 5" tires.


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

Anybody know if these will take 5 inch tires?


----------



## mn_biker (Jul 26, 2013)

tyriverag said:


> Anybody know if these will take 5 inch tires?


A 5 inch will fit the 2.0 in the front, I have a Bud on mine.

Rear tires could maybe go up to 4.25 inches, but no way a 5 fits.


----------



## Medicius (Jun 17, 2014)

So can I order just the Bluto from here and replace my front fork with it (MN2.0)?

RockShox Bluto RL Fork, 26", 100mm, Solo Air, MC, MaxleLite15, Tapered, PushLoc, Fast Black, Bl


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

Anybody preorder the 2015 2.0? I'm really torn between that and the Alaskan Alloy.

Also, Medicius. I'm not sure if the Bluto will clear the downtube. Possibly able to sand the lockout lever down a bit if it's close. Somebody said something about getting a different race. I have no idea what that means though haha.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

Medicius said:


> So can I order just the Bluto from here and replace my front fork with it (MN2.0)?
> 
> RockShox Bluto RL Fork, 26", 100mm, Solo Air, MC, MaxleLite15, Tapered, PushLoc, Fast Black, Bl


I was told head tube length, head tube angle, and dt clearance weren't enough on the 2.0 to properly support a Bluto. For what you'd pay on the Bluto, new hub, and re-lacing the front hub you should just sell your 2.0 and get a 3.0.


----------



## Stormwalker (Feb 23, 2011)

Medicius said:


> So can I order just the Bluto from here and replace my front fork with it (MN2.0)?
> 
> RockShox Bluto RL Fork, 26", 100mm, Solo Air, MC, MaxleLite15, Tapered, PushLoc, Fast Black, Bl


I would think twice about ordering it from there.


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

Another question, with these MN 2.0s as generally entry level bikes, what about a comparison to the parts on my entry level 29er, my Specialized Rockhopper, specifically the SRAM Xseries compared to Shimano Alivio and Deore? Are they roughly equivalent?


----------



## wrightcs77 (Oct 6, 2008)

tyriverag said:


> Anybody preorder the 2015 2.0? I'm really torn between that and the Alaskan Alloy.


My understanding is the Alaskan Alloy is $1700 with carbon fork, $1750 with Bluto. Compare that to the $799 (w/o spare wheelset) of the 2.0 and it is twice the price.


----------



## wrightcs77 (Oct 6, 2008)

anyone else having issues with Framed Bikes ? I have not been able to get on the site all day. Trying to compare the 2.0, 3.0, Alaskan Alloy specs.


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

wrightcs77 said:


> My understanding is the Alaskan Alloy is $1700 with carbon fork, $1750 with Bluto. Compare that to the $799 (w/o spare wheelset) of the 2.0 and it is twice the price.


$1400 for carbon fork, $1700 for bluto. I was just in there a week ago, and dude was pretty detailed, and very helpful.

Thinking about going for the 2.0, skipping the wheelset, and upgrading the RD to x9, and maybe the shifters.


----------



## Medicius (Jun 17, 2014)

Sorry, older question - did you guys replace the whole crankset or just drop the chainring down to 22t? For either answer, can you give me an idea of what brand/version you chose? I'm looking and realize there may be more to this selection than I understand.

Thanks!


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

Site works fine for me.

Also, in case anybody is interested, here is an email from Framed, answering some questions:

1. Is the 2015 Minnesota 2.0 Bluto-compatible?
Yes and no. There is a bluto that fits it but it is an after market piece along with the coupling adapters. Plus you will have to buy a 15mm through hub and have the wheel re-strung. so after all that you might as well save a $100-$150 and upgrade to the 3.0. Also the heat tube geo is not build for a suspension fork so it will ride a little strange once a bluto is put on it.

2. With respect to release time frames and any compatibility issues (outside of having to get a different hub), would I be able to buy a 2.0 with the carbon Alaskan fork, shortly after the 2.0 is released? 
The Carbon fork also is meant to fit the 3.0 with its' tapered headtube and 73.1 deg. headtube angle. Once again an adapter kit with couplings can be found but it will not ride as well as if you were to go with a fork from say On-one. 

3. When will the other colors be available to be seen online?
We should have all of the colorways up on the site within the coming week or so.

4. How do the new tires compare to the Maxxis and Vees on your other bikes? They look solid. As much self steer as the Vees?
The new Minnesota Tires on the 2.0's are modeled after a maxis tire and grant way more 4 season traction and eliminate the self steer that the missions have had in some cases.

I will also make sure that the guys upcharge you 30% for anything you buy since you are a Packer fan! LOL 

Thanks for your email Andy! Let me know if there are any other questions I can help answer for you!


----------



## wrightcs77 (Oct 6, 2008)

tyriverag said:


> $1400 for carbon fork, $1700 for bluto. I was just in there a week ago, and dude was pretty detailed, and very helpful.
> 
> Thinking about going for the 2.0, skipping the wheelset, and upgrading the RD to x9, and maybe the shifters.


Really? I just stopped in for the first time and that was what they told me.... Lol. I would be all over the Alloy at $1400 with carbon fork.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk


----------



## wrightcs77 (Oct 6, 2008)

Oddest thing, my internet provider is blocking framedbikes.com ? Go on my phone, turn off wifi and I can see the page? ODD


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

wrightcs77 said:


> Really? I just stopped in for the first time and that was what they told me.... Lol. I would be all over the Alloy at $1400 with carbon fork.
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk


Curious, why exactly? The main differences I've found:

-5 inch tire clearance
-Bluto ready
-carbon fork, though only about half a pound lighter
-slightly better componentry
-Maxxis tires, though the 2.0 tires look pretty decent

Not sure if that's worth the extra $500 to me. But maybe, ha.


----------



## wrightcs77 (Oct 6, 2008)

Mainly 190 rear spacing and I love the smooth lines.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk


----------



## MUSTCLIME (Jan 26, 2004)

wrightcs77 said:


> Oddest thing, my internet provider is blocking framedbikes.com ? Go on my phone, turn off wifi and I can see the page? ODD


The have a cookie that has their adds follow you around the internet....malware ftl


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

For anybody who is thinking of ordering a new Framed Fat Bike, Active Junky currently has a 10% Cashback at The-House.com. It could be $140 savings on a new Minnesota 3.0 with Bluto or a $90 savings on a 2.0. Imagine the savings on an Alaskan when they are available to pre-order

On the 3.0 with the Bluto by getting 10% cashback on the $1399 price, it comes out to an extra $160 over the non Bluto 3.0 model to upgrade to the Bluto model.

The House Coupons: Get coupon codes, promo codes & cash back


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

Wow great find, thank you Kawidan.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Wish I would of known about it when I ordered my 2.0 but it's good info to have when the Alaskan's are available to order


----------



## Kamala (Jun 12, 2009)

Would $150-$200 in shipping to Alaska radically change anyone's decision for the Minnesota 2.0 over one of the mid-price ($1000-$1500) fat bikes I can get at an LBS in Anchorage?


----------



## wrightcs77 (Oct 6, 2008)

Just got to see the 3.0 models and mini-sota bikes. Also the new 2.0 models. No test rides allowed, but look nice. Some pics soon

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

Got another email from a dude at Framed regarding weight and tire clearance. There seems to be discrepancies in advertised tire width vs. actual tire width (obviously that depends on rim size), but still.

Here's the email:

The MN 2.0 weighs 33.6lbs fully built and the AK alloy full production model has not arrived but the samples weighed in right around 29lbs fully built. The 2.0 can fit up to a 4.7 in the front and 4.5 in the rear.


----------



## wrightcs77 (Oct 6, 2008)

tyriverag said:


> Got another email from a dude at Framed regarding weight and tire clearance. There seems to be discrepancies in advertised tire width vs. actual tire width (obviously that depends on rim size), but still.
> 
> Here's the email:
> 
> The MN 2.0 weighs 33.6lbs fully built and the AK alloy full production model has not arrived but the samples weighed in right around 29lbs fully built. The 2.0 can fit up to a 4.7 in the front and 4.5 in the rear.


 On the AK alloy, the question is that the fully built as in top of the line components. Interesting to see weight with x7 and x9 mix.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk


----------



## jtawausau (Aug 19, 2014)

*Framed MN 2.0 (2014 model)*

So does the tire size apply to 2014 2.0's? I called and was told the rear could not accept anything bigger than a 4.0. I have my eye on the 45Nrth Vanhelga. 4.0 tubeless ready to be released next month.



tyriverag said:


> Got another email from a dude at Framed regarding weight and tire clearance. There seems to be discrepancies in advertised tire width vs. actual tire width (obviously that depends on rim size), but still.
> 
> Here's the email:
> 
> The MN 2.0 weighs 33.6lbs fully built and the AK alloy full production model has not arrived but the samples weighed in right around 29lbs fully built. The 2.0 can fit up to a 4.7 in the front and 4.5 in the rear.


----------



## blowery (Aug 28, 2014)

The geometry is the same according to their charts at framedbikes.com

However they don't say if the changed to the rear of the frame a little wider to accept a larger tire. The front could always fit the larger size.

my 2014 2.0 with lefty and 32/22 chainring.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

The 2.0 will not fit a 4.5 tire in the rear unless it's the Vee Snowshoe 4.5 tire which is really the same width as a regular 4.0 tire.


----------



## PDKL45 (Jun 1, 2008)

I am really keen to own one of these bikes and I am tossing up between the 2.0 and the 3.0. One of the big selling points for the 2.0 is the 29er wheelset. Has anyone put 29+ tires (29 x 3.0) on the 29er wheelset included with the Minnesota 2.0 yet? If so, is there clearance at the rear? 


I know it has been asked a couple of times in this thread, but I haven't seen an answer yet. Thanks in advance to anyone with any info.


----------



## PDKL45 (Jun 1, 2008)

That orange and white with the lefty's a really nice set up. Was the lefty brand new? I guess it is a little different in the US, but here in Korea, taking shipping etc into account, a new lefty is worth about US $300.00 more than a stock Minnesota 2.0.


----------



## wrightcs77 (Oct 6, 2008)

Have to decide on a bike by Sunday to use the 10% coupon. They have the 2014 2.0 in stock. I like the updated tires of the newer models.

I like the 190 spacing of the 3.0, would probably order with a Bluto and sell the Bluto (bike comes with a rigid fork, too). Also like the bb7 brakes on the 3.0.

Or do I just order an AK alloy with carbon for for $1400? 

Any help or input? Will be my only bike, used to tow kids in Burley (summer and winter) to and from daycare. Will also be my fun bike.


----------



## JAGI410 (Apr 19, 2008)

AK Alloys are not likely to be available until January. It'll be hard to wait that long!


----------



## tyriverag (Jan 22, 2014)

AK Alloys not available until January? I thought mid-November. I was basically sold on that one. May now lean towards a new 2.0, though the Alloy was exactly what I was looking for.


----------



## jtawausau (Aug 19, 2014)

*Framed 2.0 w/29er's*

I have swapped out the fatties for the 29er's. It handles very well on the street, and of course rolls a lot easier. There is still good clearance, in reference to the crank. I'm not sure I would use these on single track, at least not without first putting meatier tires on it. Plus with no shock on the front would not be as much fun as the 4.0's. I don't see why a 3.0 tire in the rear wouldn't work. Hope that helps!



PDKL45 said:


> I am really keen to own one of these bikes and I am tossing up between the 2.0 and the 3.0. One of the big selling points for the 2.0 is the 29er wheelset. Has anyone put 29+ tires (29 x 3.0) on the 29er wheelset included with the Minnesota 2.0 yet? If so, is there clearance at the rear?
> 
> I know it has been asked a couple of times in this thread, but I haven't seen an answer yet. Thanks in advance to anyone with any info.


----------



## twright205 (Oct 2, 2011)

someone with more info will likely chime in,, but the 29+ (3.0) from surly don't recommend them going on rims narrower than I think 35mm... not sure what the rims from the skinny package are.. but check that out first before you buy...


----------



## PDKL45 (Jun 1, 2008)

The rim size is what I was thinking about actually, but having thought about it, Big Apple 2.35s would probably be okay. Basically I was wondering about a 29er tire that had a relatively large volume of air in the tires for cushioned street riding on the 2.0. I have a massive network of bike paths (hundreds and hundreds of kilometers of dedicated bike paths) around me and like to mix it up between those and the trails nearby, but the paths can be a little rough in patches, especially after winter and between towns.


----------



## Medicius (Jun 17, 2014)

Over the last two weekends and one weekday ride, I've fielded questions from multiple riders about the Framed bikes. Either Framed/The-House is upping the advertisement factor somehow or Average Joe riders like myself are doing a good job of selling the bikes... 

I don't mind the questions in any way shape or form. It just feels like they're coming about more frequently now than they were even a month ago. Though, that said, a couple of the conversations have been steered by the other party to the Alaskan and the Bluto version. 

Anyway, it's nice to hear some additional positive review reactions from riders with other manufacturers fat bikes, those looking for an entrance into fat biking, or those just looking to say hi.


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

Hi, hoping folks are still monitoring this thread. Bought a 2.0 on Friday. Spent about 7 hours on it over the weekend. All I can say is, what fun! Beyond being 7 years old again, I'd like to use it for winter commuting and bikepacking. Has anyone successfully put a rack on their 2.0? I've emailed OMM to ask whether their 170mm sherpa will fit on it. There's also a 190mm sherpa that might work with fabricating aluminum spacers betweent he stay and the dropout threading. Love OMM (I've had a front rack in the past), but I'm wondering whether anyone might have made a less expensive rack work.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

revcp said:


> Hi, hoping folks are still monitoring this thread. Bought a 2.0 on Friday. Spent about 7 hours on it over the weekend. All I can say is, what fun! Beyond being 7 years old again, I'd like to use it for winter commuting and bikepacking. Has anyone successfully put a rack on their 2.0? I've emailed OMM to ask whether their 170mm sherpa will fit on it. There's also a 190mm sherpa that might work with fabricating aluminum spacers betweent he stay and the dropout threading. Love OMM (I've had a front rack in the past), but I'm wondering whether anyone might have made a less expensive rack work.


I'd checkout the Framed Minnesota Fat Bike user group on Facebook. I've seen a lot of different configs in that group.


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Morej said:


> Is there anyone who converted the Minnesota to tubeless? How difficult was it? I looked at the rim strip, I guess it has to be trimmed. What about the inner holes on the rims?


I did, didn't have to do anything with the rim strips, although I had previously put some duct tape under the factory strips for color. I used the split-tube method with 24" BMX tubes and Stans. The tires are loose on the rim so the bead never really locks in place, but I've put in a lot of dirt/rock miles since the install and no issues. The first one took a while to get seated and aired up, the second went on first try. To keep the bead in place while inflating, I put a 29er tube around the outside.


----------



## PDKL45 (Jun 1, 2008)

revcp said:


> Hi, hoping folks are still monitoring this thread.


I'm monitoring the Framed website, waiting for the new Minnesota 2.0 color schemes to go up. The House website has them up but they're just Photoshops. Hard to pre-order without having a decent look at the bike (although the white frame with red ano rims looks quite nice as a small Photoshop image).


----------



## William Johnson Jr (Oct 2, 2014)

I just ordered the 2015 Minnesota 2.0 in white/red...backordered until 10/9/14 from TheHouse.com. I can't resist those anodized red rims/hubs. Should be here in plenty of time before the white stuff flies in Western NY!


----------



## wildskycomet (Sep 15, 2005)

Kawidan said:


> For anybody who is thinking of ordering a new Framed Fat Bike, Active Junky currently has a 10% Cashback at The-House.com. It could be $140 savings on a new Minnesota 3.0 with Bluto or a $90 savings on a 2.0. Imagine the savings on an Alaskan when they are available to pre-order
> 
> On the 3.0 with the Bluto by getting 10% cashback on the $1399 price, it comes out to an extra $160 over the non Bluto 3.0 model to upgrade to the Bluto model.
> 
> The House Coupons: Get coupon codes, promo codes & cash back


Waiting for mine in So Vt! First Bluto on the block. Other fatties are killing the singletrack now, especially after dark thirty


----------



## Yetiski (Nov 15, 2010)

If anyone has used a Bluto on a 2.0 what headset did you use for lower and was there any clearance issues.


----------



## MUSTCLIME (Jan 26, 2004)

If "the house" wants to make some money..they should offer a bluto front wheel. I have been pricing out one and they could do better.


----------



## aClockworkJake (Sep 26, 2014)

Hey guys -- New to the forums here, and relatively new to the cycling world in general. This past weekend I stopped by The House Boardshop intending to just "browse" some of the fat bikes they had in the showroom. Long story short, I got on the 2.0 for a test ride and within half an hour I had my credit card out. 

Now I'm pretty new to the cycling world -- my only previous exposure was the amount of BMX riding I had done maybe 7-8 years ago. So excuse me for any times I sound like a complete newbie.

Yesterday I took the Minnesota 2.0 out for a ride down along the Minnesota River Valley. There's a private entrance less than a miles ride from my house, which is mainly used by folks on horseback. The entrance to the trail is almost entirely loose sand leading up to the big sand barge -- this was a perfect introduction to what the bike could handle.









The sand here is very loose and quite deep, so making the climb was an absolute workout. I don't think the stock Vee tires are meant for deep sand terrain like this and I also think I was running the psi a little high on the back tire. I knew this was the case, and I've already been researching a new pair of tires for once the snow flies. The fellow at The House did tell me that I should stop back in once the first snow fall hits and he'll give me a free pair of the Framed winter tires -- which I believe he compared to Surly Knards. Heck -- I'll take a free pair of tires if they're offered.

Made my way down to the river bottoms and hit some of the dirt trails. Most of this area is underwater a few months out of the year some once it all dries up over the summer the ground is pretty bumpy and packed hard. The Minnesota handled these sections like a champ, and things got really fun.









I'm about 5'10" with a 32" inseam and decided to go with the 18" frame. I think the bike fits me really well, but personal preference is going to force me to replace the stem with something a bit shorter than the stock 100mm, and I'm also going to replace the stock handlebars with something that has a bit more rise. Other than personal preference, everything else on the bike performed quite well for a preliminary ride basically straight from the shop.









All in all the total trip was just under 15 miles spanning terrain over deep sand, packed dirt, and gravel. I already can't wait to get back out there for another ride!


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

Just saw this review/write up on Gear Junkie...kind of cool to see the whole Mom, Dad, and Kid bikes.

A Fat Bike For Kids (and parents, too)


----------



## paul88 (Oct 29, 2014)

Hi everyone, I just ordered a 2015 Minnesota 2.0 in black with green rim! It is back order until Nov. 24th. It will be there in time for the snow! I also ordered the extra 29er wheelset to use when I commute. I really like the idea of both wheelset this is what made me choose the Minnesota 2.0, I wanted to try a fat bike but wasn't sure enought and at the same time I needed a new bike to go in trails and ride around town.


----------



## burnhamish (Sep 4, 2014)

revcp said:


> Hi, hoping folks are still monitoring this thread. Bought a 2.0 on Friday. Spent about 7 hours on it over the weekend. All I can say is, what fun! Beyond being 7 years old again, I'd like to use it for winter commuting and bikepacking. Has anyone successfully put a rack on their 2.0? I've emailed OMM to ask whether their 170mm sherpa will fit on it. There's also a 190mm sherpa that might work with fabricating aluminum spacers betweent he stay and the dropout threading. Love OMM (I've had a front rack in the past), but I'm wondering whether anyone might have made a less expensive rack work.


I have a 2.0 and installed an Ibera PakRak IB-RA5 Touring Plus rack. I needed to elevate it, and gently urge the supports a little wider. It is designed for disc brakes. I used my own extensions to the seat stays, but you can get longer rods that may do the job. I don't know if this rack will withstand an extended off-road tour, but I have the same rack in standard brake style on another bike and it has held up to my commuting loads with no issues.








Edited: I commuted with it today (12.5 miles so far) and it is still attached. And I find the Fattie Slims I got with the bike to be more conducive to pavement than the fat wheels. Although the fat tires do turn some heads in suburban Chicago.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

Can't decide between 2.0, 3.0 and new alloy 
Any help would be great


----------



## wildskycomet (Sep 15, 2005)

I picked a 3 for wider wheel options, upgraded components (also a Bluto, since they offered standard form also), then different tires. Thought it would be quicker than Alaska and didn't see value in different frame cost. Haven't received bike yet. Somewhere off-shore(?!). 2 seemed pretty slick. One in window at LBS. The House said 2's & 3's to be unloaded soon. Alaskas later delivery


----------



## homebrewtim (Sep 26, 2014)

Just looking at them is addictive. I will have about $1000 budget. Looking at Minnesota 2.0 '14 or '15. Does anything stand out between the models? First Fat Bike (and mountain bike) for me. It'll do time on local trails in NH year-round when I'm not riding my cross bike.


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

I'd go 2015 for the tires. I have a 2014 but the new Minnesota tires look like they have an amazing tread pattern.


----------



## wildskycomet (Sep 15, 2005)

A few folks (men & wives) running fatties year-round. Killing it!


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

just ordered the 2015 2.0 White/red! I am 5'9" and ordered the 18" , hope that works out for me. I am stoked and ready for the snow! great price for that bike!


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

Give that 18" a good test ride. I'm 5'10" and have the 16" 2014,which fits me perfectly.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

16" seems cramped, I have longer arms, still went with the 18". Once I get that bad boy I will give some feedback


----------



## homebrewtim (Sep 26, 2014)

mncyclist said:


> I'd go 2015 for the tires. I have a 2014 but the new Minnesota tires look like they have an amazing tread pattern.


I just compared the specs across the two....seems like it's worth $100 or so difference. I'll have to see whats available. Hoping to test ride this week or the week before Thanksgiving.


----------



## Greenfin (Jun 13, 2011)

StevePodraza said:


> just ordered the 2015 2.0 White/red! I am 5'9" and ordered the 18" , hope that works out for me. I am stoked and ready for the snow! great price for that bike!


What were your thoughts on stand over height?


----------



## GalenCopes (Dec 5, 2013)

StevePodraza said:


> just ordered the 2015 2.0 White/red! I am 5'9" and ordered the 18" , hope that works out for me. I am stoked and ready for the snow! great price for that bike!


I am 5'10" and have a 2.0 18 inch. I absolutely love my bike. My only regret is that I didn't size down to the 16". The stand-over height on my bike is 33". Without shoes, the top tube makes contact with sensitive parts. With shoes, I barely clear the top tube. I recommend you measure your inseam and be VERY honest with yourself about the length.

Good luck, you will love the bike!

Galen


----------



## homebrewtim (Sep 26, 2014)

This may be answered elsewhere, but are the Fattie Slims just 29" rims? How wide of a mountainbike tire could I run on those?


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

Re all the sizing questions, I posted above that at 5'10" (with a 31" inseam) I purchased a 16" and have been very happy with it. I built my racer up as a 56cm, my touring as a 57.5cm, my commuter is a 19" '91 Stumpjumper drop bar conversion. Size, for me, really depends on intended use. I'm comfortable with having very little standover with my tourer and commuter. I prefer a smaller and more nimble frame for racing, and the mountain bikes I have had have also had small frames.

The MN 2.0 is different from most fatbikes that tend to be more stretched out. It has a more aggressive, trail-like geometry. I like that I am not stretched out at all on my 16". I fell that allows me to take better advantage of its quickness. I also think a bit more standover is very important for a fatbike, as the terraine on which one rides is often uneven enough that when one puts one's foot down it isn't necessarily on level ground. Sizing is certainly a "to each his/her own" thing, but if someone is between sizes and wondering whether to go larger or smaller I would recommend the latter.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

Thanks for all the advice guys! Changed my order to the 16! 😃


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

StevePodraza said:


> Thanks for all the advice guys! Changed my order to the 16! 😃


@StevePodraza, you'll love the bike. And you can always make a bike a bit "bigger" with a longer stem and raising the seatpost. It's much harder to make a bike smaller. I agree the price on these is great. Excellent platform for personalizing. My mods so far are 32/22 chainrings (Ebay and Niagara), X0 Shifters from EBay, X9 RD from Jenson (the 2010 model, so much less expensive), Brooks B17 saddle I switched over from my touring bike (you either love 'em or hate 'em), Titec Hellbent bars (Ebay again, $18, narrower by about 2" and 1.5" rise) and Ergon GS1 grips.


----------



## pclement (Feb 12, 2013)

homebrewtim said:


> This may be answered elsewhere, but are the Fattie Slims just 29" rims? How wide of a mountainbike tire could I run on those?


I believe the extra set is essentially 700c x 32mm. I don't know that I would recommend much beyond a 2:1 tire to wheel ratio, but it can depend upon the tire and wheel set combination you are working with. In any event, I'm talking about a 2.5" tire in this instance.


----------



## homebrewtim (Sep 26, 2014)

pclement said:


> I believe the extra set is essentially 700c x 32mm. I don't know that I would recommend much beyond a 2:1 tire to wheel ratio, but it can depend upon the tire and wheel set combination you are working with. In any event, I'm talking about a 2.5" tire in this instance.


Thanks..I ride a cross bike and have a couple sets of 33's. I'd like to ride 45's or more. 2-2.5" is more than sufficient. I just wanted to know my options to see if it was worth the set of wheels. I think it is.


----------



## homebrewtim (Sep 26, 2014)

More sizing questions:

I am a noob to mountain bike sizing. I ride a Crux 56 (cyclcocross bike) with a 31.8" standover height. It fits great, and rides well for me. I was fit at my LBS. It fits great.

I am 6 feet tall and wear a 32" inseam. I intend to hopefully ride these before I purchase, but what is the advice for sizing?

If there is a thread dedicated to this conversation or better place to ask this then I'll move the question there.

Thanks!


----------



## paul88 (Oct 29, 2014)

homebrewtim said:


> More sizing questions:
> 
> I am a noob to mountain bike sizing. I ride a Crux 56 (cyclcocross bike) with a 31.8" standover height. It fits great, and rides well for me. I was fit at my LBS. It fits great.
> 
> ...


I haven't mesured myself and didn't saw the bike yet but someone here said that the the 16" frame was 31.5" standover height and the 18" frame was 33" standover height


----------



## homebrewtim (Sep 26, 2014)

To add some info. I think 18 will be the sweet spot based on what I've read online and talking to a friend who knows me and bikes. I wanted to see what the responses were here from those with Fat Bikes and or Moutain Bikes.

Hopefully this is readable. Framed Minnesota 2.0


----------



## pclement (Feb 12, 2013)

homebrewtim said:


> More sizing questions:
> 
> I am a noob to mountain bike sizing. I ride a Crux 56 (cyclcocross bike) with a 31.8" standover height. It fits great, and rides well for me. I was fit at my LBS. It fits great.
> 
> ...


I'm 6'2" with about a 33" inseam but I went with the 20" because this bike has a shorter top tube on average, and I didn't like the drop in comparison to the seat tube on the 18" .


----------



## homebrewtim (Sep 26, 2014)

pclement said:


> I'm 6'2" with about a 33" inseam but I went with the 20" because this bike has a shorter top tube on average, and I didn't like the drop in comparison to the seat tube on the 18" .


SO you are saying the 20 has a shorter top tube but longer effective top tube length and thus less drop from head tube to seat tube?

I'm not sure I completely understand.


----------



## pclement (Feb 12, 2013)

homebrewtim said:


> SO you are saying the 20 has a shorter top tube but longer effective top tube length and thus less drop from head tube to seat tube?
> 
> I'm not sure I completely understand.


The top tube on the Minnesota 2.0 is shorter, on average, in comparison to other mountain bikes. With respect to the 20" vs. 18" you sit a bit lower on the 18", which I don't need. That is, unless you raise the seat post.

Perhaps the 32" standover height works better for you, but for me 33" is perfectly fine. I'm closer to 6'3" than 6', which is the max height recommended for the 18".


----------



## homebrewtim (Sep 26, 2014)

pclement said:


> The top tube on the Minnesota 2.0 is shorter, on average, in comparison to other mountain bikes. With respect to the 20" vs. 18" you sit a bit lower on the 18", which I don't need. That is, unless you raise the seat post.
> 
> Perhaps the 32" standover height works better for you, but for me 33" is perfectly fine. I'm closer to 6'3" than 6', which is the max height recommended for the 18".


Got it. Thanks. I am not buying until I hop on each. I am on the line between the two and suspect I am closer to the 18, but I might as well go take a look and see what the LBS says as well.

Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## homebrewtim (Sep 26, 2014)

I know this is a LITTLE off topic but what are the thoughts on the new 3.0 w/rigid fork versus the 2.0? Is it worth the upgrade? I noticed some differences in geometry as well.

Cheers.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

Pretty sure the 3.0 has more of a tractor feel


----------



## homebrewtim (Sep 26, 2014)

StevePodraza said:


> Pretty sure the 3.0 has more of a tractor feel


Cool. Thanks...I can see that on the XL but I did not really get that from the description. I was weighing whether to spend the money on the 2.0 + Fattie Slims and put good all-around mountain bike tires on those, or look towards the 3.0 and save my money to grab the Bluto Fork later in the summer.


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

homebrewtim said:


> Cool. Thanks...I can see that on the XL but I did not really get that from the description. I was weighing whether to spend the money on the 2.0 + Fattie Slims and put good all-around mountain bike tires on those, or look towards the 3.0 and save my money to grab the Bluto Fork later in the summer.


I've been by The House bike shop a few times. When I went in with a friend a few weeks ago so he could pay for a 2.0 we took a look at the 3.0. Longer effective top tube, so appears it will not be as nimble as the 2.0. I confess I don't see the need for a suspension fork on a fatbike. I know some folk are convinced they need it, but we can talk ourselves into thinking we "need" just about everything.


----------



## homebrewtim (Sep 26, 2014)

revcp said:


> I've been by The House bike shop a few times. When I went in with a friend a few weeks ago so he could pay for a 2.0 we took a look at the 3.0. Longer effective top tube, so appears it will not be as nimble as the 2.0. I confess I don't see the need for a suspension fork on a fatbike. I know some folk are convinced they need it, but we can talk ourselves into thinking we "need" just about everything.


Awesome. Thanks. I was thinking the Bluto fork was a great option, but am easily swayed into the next, bigger, better, etc. I want to keep my cost as close to $1,000 or less. I suspect the 2.0 or 3.0 will both exceed my expectations and provide all I need on local MTB trails. Ultimately it may come down to what's available at my LBS when I'm ready to pull the trigger.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

16 is not available until end of the month so I went with 18, after talking with Ebin at the house I feel good about it. Adding race face atlas stem(black) and bars (red). Also going 1x with a race face (red)narrow wide! So stoked!


----------



## blefevre (Feb 1, 2011)

Medicius said:


> Sorry, older question - did you guys replace the whole crankset or just drop the chainring down to 22t? For either answer, can you give me an idea of what brand/version you chose? I'm looking and realize there may be more to this selection than I understand.
> 
> Thanks!


I'm looking for an answer to this too. Does anyone know what the BCD is? I want to order a 2.0 but I know I will need 22/36 gearing to make it in the mountains so I am trying to get the 'total cost' first. That is, of course, before upgrades


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

I went with 32/22 Truvativ rings, 104 and 64 BCD respectively. I got one from EBay and the other from Niagara. Total cost was less than $30.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

so converting to a 1X on the 2.0, will a 104bcd work? hopefully... I ordered a 30T race face 104.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Yes crank is 104BCD. I did that mod to my 2.0 earlier this year.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

great, thank you!


----------



## Pillage&Burn (Jul 18, 2008)

I'm in a little bit of a pickle here, and not sure what to order. It's between the Minnesota 2.0 and 3.0. I'm almost 5'11". I ride a Large Niner EMD. I'm thinking an 18" frame with a 110mm stem could be doable. I'm not a fan of the shorter top tube length on the 2.0, but like the price, the white/red color, and that I can get the other 29 wheels to go 29+ if I like. On the other hand, the 3.0 has better choices for geometry, is lighter, and appears as if it can handle 2 water bottles. No 29er wheel set though.

This will be my first fat bike, but I was thinking if I really like it, I'd probably do alot more riding on it, even race the Iceman and some other XC races here in Michigan on it... hence the desire for two waterbottles... Taking it on 30-40 mile training rides that include back country dirt roads, rail trails, and some singletrack are a typical ride for me.

Any advice you guys could offer me would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Pillage&Burn said:


> I'm in a little bit of a pickle here, and not sure what to order. It's between the Minnesota 2.0 and 3.0. I'm almost 5'11". I ride a Large Niner EMD. I'm thinking an 18" frame with a 110mm stem could be doable. I'm not a fan of the shorter top tube length on the 2.0, but like the price, the white/red color, and that I can get the other 29 wheels to go 29+ if I like. On the other hand, the 3.0 has better choices for geometry, is lighter, and appears as if it can handle 2 water bottles. No 29er wheel set though.
> 
> This will be my first fat bike, but I was thinking if I really like it, I'd probably do alot more riding on it, even race the Iceman and some other XC races here in Michigan on it... hence the desire for two waterbottles... Taking it on 30-40 mile training rides that include back country dirt roads, rail trails, and some singletrack are a typical ride for me.
> 
> Any advice you guys could offer me would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!


I like my 2.0, and the 29er wheels are a great option, especially if you are using this as your main bike 4 seasons. As far as 29+, you'll probably need to get some wider rims if you really want to to use 3" tires. That being said, it rides and handles great with the stock wheels and 2.3-2.4 tire. Since I already have a 29er I love, I ordered some Velocity Blunt 35 rims to relace the 29er wheels to make it a true 29+. If you don't think you'll go through all that, go with the upgraded spec on the 3.0. Looks like the fat bike standard is moving to tapered forks and 190 rears, so it will hopefully be viable longer, or at least until they come up with a new standard again.


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

blefevre said:


> I'm looking for an answer to this too. Does anyone know what the BCD is? I want to order a 2.0 but I know I will need 22/36 gearing to make it in the mountains so I am trying to get the 'total cost' first. That is, of course, before upgrades


I replaced just the 28 with a 22, I liked having the wider gear range with the 38 big ring. I had an unused 22 from a Truvativ crankset I've been using as a single on another bike. The small rings don't have ramps or pins for shifting, so you don't need to go wild on a high end ring. BCD for the granny is 64.


----------



## Pillage&Burn (Jul 18, 2008)

Yeah, thanks for the feedback. I went with the 18" 2.0. It's my first fatty, and money is tight so I figured this would be a great introduction. If I like it, down the road I'll probably sell it and upgrade. I passed on the fatty slims cause like you said, its not a true 29+, and I have a Niner EMD that is pretty sweet.... why spend the cash. I'll save that 100 bucks on the wheelset and apply it towards a carbon fork I have my eye on! I'm ok with not doing 190, I can't really see ever needing more than 4" on the rear tire. I can see the argument otherwise, but for this price... I'm happy.


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Pillage&Burn said:


> Yeah, thanks for the feedback. I went with the 18" 2.0. It's my first fatty, and money is tight so I figured this would be a great introduction. If I like it, down the road I'll probably sell it and upgrade. I passed on the fatty slims cause like you said, its not a true 29+, and I have a Niner EMD that is pretty sweet.... why spend the cash. I'll save that 100 bucks on the wheelset and apply it towards a carbon fork I have my eye on! I'm ok with not doing 190, I can't really see ever needing more than 4" on the rear tire. I can see the argument otherwise, but for this price... I'm happy.


Another up-side to going with the 170 is that as folks decide they NEED to get the newest thing, they may start unloading some sweet "oboslete" 170 wheels and cranksets. Retailers may do the same. Makes it better for you financially when/if you decide to start upgrading parts.


----------



## PerraHunter (Nov 3, 2013)

MTBLoCo29 said:


> I replaced just the 28 with a 22, I liked having the wider gear range with the 38 big ring. I had an unused 22 from a Truvativ crankset I've been using as a single on another bike. The small rings don't have ramps or pins for shifting, so you don't need to go wild on a high end ring. BCD for the granny is 64.


Yeah, just like he said. Don't spend real money on this and don't sweat it either. The Truvativ steel or aluminum ring is available on Amazon for about $12. Keep the big ring.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

my White/Red 2.0 will be in the 21st! stoked! going 1X (30T Raceface) adding Atlas 35mm bars (red) along with the atlas stem(black) now that we have snow here in Minnesota and the trails are already groomed in the Twin Cities it will be F'n killer!


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

The 2.0 is a blast! Got it set up as a 1x! Perfect with race face atlas stem and bars! Just cut the bars down to 720mm, now they are perfect!


----------



## aarontriton (Apr 4, 2009)

I like the White with red accents saw that at my local dealer and it is sharp!


----------



## mncyclist (Nov 30, 2013)

StevePodraza said:


> View attachment 941465
> The 2.0 is a blast! Got it set up as a 1x! Perfect with race face atlas stem and bars! Just cut the bars down to 720mm, now they are perfect!


That there is a good looking bike. What do you think of their new tires? Particularly in the snow?


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

thanks! the Mn tires work great in the snow! lovin the bike, glad I went with an 18" 1x works flawless!


----------



## shredmx (Dec 11, 2013)

what size inseam are you? I am a 30inch inseam torn between a 16 and 18 frame. I normally ride medium frames and shorten stem. Are these bikes better than bikes direct?


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

I am 5'9" , I normally wear 34/32 jeans, but I dont think my inseam is actually 32. 18 fits me perfect. hope that helps. I dont know alot about bikes direct, I am very happy with the 2.0


----------



## shredmx (Dec 11, 2013)

StevePodraza said:


> I am 5'9" , I normally wear 34/32 jeans, but I dont think my inseam is actually 32. 18 fits me perfect. hope that helps. I dont know alot about bikes direct, I am very happy with the 2.0


Yeah I am 5'8 with 30 inch inseam but wear 32 length pants. Did you shorten the stem at all? I like more of a upright position when riding so I shorten stem and put riser bars on usually. What tires are on that bike? Do they work good in snow? I will just be using this for winter riding only. What did parts did you get to swap it out to a 1x? Thanks that bike looks awesome I am usually partial to black but this looks like an exception.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

you should be fine, I set it up with a 50mm Raceface atlas stem and went with the new 35mm diameter for the Raceface atlas bars, great combo. Tires are the Minnesota 4.0, great in the snow! for the 1X I went with 30tooth up front, The House where I purchased the bike (Stephan the mechanic-did a great job!) set it up for me with the stock crank. it works flawless! I have an all black Liteville 301 for summer so I went with this White/Red combo which I think is just awesome!


----------



## Pillage&Burn (Jul 18, 2008)

StevePodraza, your new 2.0 looks awesome! Glad to hear it fits right and is a ton of fun.

I decided to go a different route, canceled my order, and went with a new large Specialized Fat Boy... Love it. Big group ride tonight in the dark. Can't wait!


----------



## kmpi68mtb (Dec 12, 2009)

*Waiting Waiting Boom - Arrived today!*

Finally my 2.0 arrived today
ordered in late October... Excited to swap the 28t chainring to a 24t and set the tires up Tubeless for this weekend! Yay Finally! :thumbsup:
Silver/Blue 18


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

Cool! Post a picture When you can


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Can't wait to see the Silver/Blue color scheme.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Here are some pics of the Silver and Blue


----------



## aarontriton (Apr 4, 2009)

Well that's a real nice surprise!

Sent from my Z750C using Tapatalk


----------



## kmpi68mtb (Dec 12, 2009)

*Silver / Blue Pics*

OK Here are some of my 2.0 Silver/Blue 18
Showing how it looked 
1. When I opened the box
2. Full bike
3. Film covering the decals (appreciated!!) ...welds 
4. The chain-line in the granny gear (for those interested in tire clearance) 
5. Rear wheel 
6. Framed tire tread -Nice Looking tread !!

All in all, I am pleased with how it arrived... needs some love - will take the headset apart and re-grease (feels a bit sticky)
few minor scratches on the blue wheels - nothing horrible.
The cockpit is certainly shorter than I am used to - I may need a longer stem or a lay back seatpost... we will see.
Very, very happy with the quality for price ratio - but have not ridden her yet. :thumbsup:

Sorry about the floral carpet....come on you love it...


----------



## Steve Javorsky (Jul 22, 2014)

Issues with my 2.0. Normal riding, 1 month old just under 100 miles.

Sent from my SGH-S959G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

ouch , not good. I am sure Framed will do something for you.


----------



## Steve Javorsky (Jul 22, 2014)

I am sure FRAMED / my bike shop will take care of this as well, but I bet I don't get it back until some time after January or later... This is the part I am not going to be able to deal with.

Sent from my SGH-S959G using Tapatalk 2


----------



## mccarthy (Sep 10, 2014)

steve - just curious if that's a 2014 or a 2015? A few people had failures in the exact same place on the 2014 bikes. I've been wondering if they changed anything to try to fix this issue.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

2015.


----------



## cr45h (Jan 13, 2007)

Dude Steve, that sucks big time!!


----------



## Steve Javorsky (Jul 22, 2014)

Yes it is a 2015. Yes it sucks, but it really worked out better for me. My LBS called FRAMED and they are going to take care of it, and I asked my LBS to ask FRAMED if I could upgrade to the 3.0. FRAMED said sure, we have some in the right size and they are only going to charge me the difference from the 2.0 to the 3.0, plus I had him order a bluto. So in the end, I am getting the bike I wanted all along it was just not in stock at the time I purchased my 2.0. Things could not have worked out better, and I should have my new 3.0 with bluto on next Tuesday or Wednesday !!!! Great service FRAMED and my LBS !!!!!!!


----------



## PerraHunter (Nov 3, 2013)

Steve Javorsky said:


> Issues with my 2.0. Normal riding, 1 month old just under 100 miles.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-S959G using Tapatalk 2


So yours makes a grand total of four broken frames that we know of. The house was quite prompt in making mine right. The biggest delay in the process was my own lack of urgency.

Still far more reliable than the specialized fatboy!


----------



## Greenfin (Jun 13, 2011)

I just got back from riding a 1.0 small and 2.0 small. I am 5'10" tall with a 32" inseam and neither one affored me much stand over clearance. If you will be riding snow and encountering trail conditions with a deeper soft snow on the side I would recommend downsizing one level with these framed bikes. They are not geared toward snow riding but for more year round use.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

I'm 5'9" and the 18 is perfect. I have no problem riding thru snow with the framed 2.0


----------



## Greenfin (Jun 13, 2011)

My bad let me say it another way. Riding a bike that has very little or normal stand over height through the snow is not The problem. The issue comes from having to dismount a floatation bike when it's floating in the snow or stepping off into deep unpacked snow. What I am saying is the more stand over the better. Do you have a 34" inseam? 

There are lots of bikes out there if someone is trying to find a snow specific bike with the framed 1.0 or 2.0 I am recommending dropping a size to save your nuts. Or look else where for a more snow specific bike.


----------



## PerraHunter (Nov 3, 2013)

Greenfin said:


> I just got back from riding a 1.0 small and 2.0 small. I am 5'10" tall with a 32" inseam and neither one affored me much stand over clearance. If you will be riding snow and encountering trail conditions with a deeper soft snow on the side I would recommend downsizing one level with these framed bikes. They are not geared toward snow riding but for more year round use.


I've been rocking (and rooting, and mudbogging and a bit of snow too, for that matter) my 2.0 since February, and found the 18 to be just fine, at 32".

I maintain that stand over is more critical when failing a stone wall crossing than when stepping off into a snow drift. Stand over height is a bit of a red herring anyway. We don't seem to sit on them on the seat, why would we sit on them on the top tube? Besides, anyone who lets them dangle, deserves to sit on them. YMMV !!!


----------



## Greenfin (Jun 13, 2011)

*For what it's worth*

Just pulled the trigger on my wife's 2015 framed 2.0 small in white and red. I picked up the commuter wheel set as well. I decided to support my LBS in West Virginia instead of the Internet. He tells me it should ship around the the 15th.

My wife is pretty stoked. Her first fatty and her first new bike since she was a wee lass.

She's 5'8" with a 33" inseam and liked the small best.


----------



## shredmx (Dec 11, 2013)

I cannot find any of these bikes I have been waiting for month for one through a friend who is a dealer they keep giving him the run around. Anyone know why there is a delay? I called framed and never called me back.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

Here is the latest on the West Coast Shipping Delay that was posted today. All the updates can be found on The House Website. If you really want one of these bikes they can be ordered online. Some colors and sizes are in-stock

Framed Minnesota 2.0 Fat Bike 2015


----------



## Greenfin (Jun 13, 2011)

LBS told me my wifes small 2.0 red/white was the last one in current shipment. Which will ship the 12th.


----------



## uncleleo (Aug 2, 2014)

Just got my wife's 2.0 Women's in. Has anyone had good luck finding matching purple anodized parts? I think we may need a shorter stem. I found some waterbottle cages on Ebay, but I'm not positive if they will be quite the same shade of purple. Wow. This is what I worry about now... May replace bars, cranks and seatpost with purple stuff if I can find it too.


----------



## shredmx (Dec 11, 2013)

uncleleo said:


> Just got my wife's 2.0 Women's in. Has anyone had good luck finding matching purple anodized parts? I think we may need a shorter stem. I found some waterbottle cages on Ebay, but I'm not positive if they will be quite the same shade of purple. Wow. This is what I worry about now... May replace bars, cranks and seatpost with purple stuff if I can find it too.


Not sure if it matches but deity makes anodized purple stems.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

The Deity stuff is probably the closest match I've seen to the Purple.

Here are the Purple Deity Bars. As you can see they match pretty closely. The Blackburn Purple pedals are not an exact match. As for the cage, Bontrager makes a Purple RL cage but it's not an exact match.


----------



## Cycle Nomad (Aug 30, 2005)

I got the 2015 Framed Minnesota 2.0 a few weeks ago and have been happy with it overall after a little customizing, but a I realized one problem.
In the sales video it stated that the bike came with sealed alloy pedals with removable pins. On the site, it states the 2015 model comes with Wellgo pedals.
Now, I mistakenly thought this means the alloy pedals with removable pins would be Wellgos!
Nope, it came with cheap plastic nubby pedals that are Wellgos.

I emailed them about this, and on the second try they returned my email, stating the video was the 2014 model, the 2015 comes with Wellgo plastic pedals.....and of course, thanks for being a customer.

So just be aware that the 2015 Framed Minnesota will come with cheap plastic Wellgo
pedals.....not the alloy ones in the video.

I use clipless, but thought a good set of flats would have been good for heavier snow and snowboots.


----------



## uncleleo (Aug 2, 2014)

Thanks Kawidan, very helpful.


----------



## phokingood (Jan 13, 2015)

*front hub/tire/brake ? Minnesota 2.0 2015*

I'm having an issue with the front wheel being held up by the brake pad, I think.... It moves freely but if I spin the tire by hand it stops after a revolution or two. I get a little more if I back off the brake pad but by the point it helps it grabs at the very end of the pull. Thinking about putting in a few tiny washers to keep the rotor off the inside pad. Any ideas?


----------



## Bugout Bikes (Jan 8, 2015)

After taking some time to look at their new lineup, it seems like their bikes are a great value but, I'm not a fan of the color schemes this year which is a bummer. Was debating giving my wife the monster and getting a 3.0


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kleebs (Mar 18, 2014)

Anybody know what bottom bracket standard the 2.0 uses?


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Kleebs said:


> Anybody know what bottom bracket standard the 2.0 uses?


100mm bottom bracket for a 170mm rear wheel.


----------



## uncleleo (Aug 2, 2014)

phokingood said:


> I'm having an issue with the front wheel being held up by the brake pad, I think....


I am assuming you have checked this, but my wife's bike was having a similar issue. There is a little too much slack in the cable, so the cable housing sometimes gets hung up on the part on the frame that should be holding it in place. Causing the brakes to hang up until the housing is seated back where it belongs.


----------



## davidrhorn (Mar 20, 2006)

Quick question for anyone with a 2.0...what size is the seat tube? I want to buy a chain suck device and it comes in two different sizes. Any help would be awesome!

-Dave


----------



## Kleebs (Mar 18, 2014)

MTBLoCo29 said:


> 100mm bottom bracket for a 170mm rear wheel.


Thanks. I managed to fry my bottom bracket and am in the market for a replacement. Now comes the inevitable debate of getting a replacement cartridge internal bottom bracket like a phil wood that is compatible with the stock cranks, or take the opportunity to upgrade to an external bearing BB with new cranks. Specifically looking at the Race Face offerings for option #2.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

A lot of people on the Facebook Group have been upgrading to the SRAM X5 with the GXP bottom bracket. You get a better BB and better gearing and the crank is about 300g lighter. You can pick it up on Ebay for just over $100

SRAM X5 Fat Bike GXP100 Crankset 2014 > Components > Drivetrain > Cranksets | Jenson USA


----------



## bruwill (Feb 12, 2015)

Just purchased the RaceFace 22/32 chainring set. Will I have to take out a couple of links in the stock chain, or will it work as is? Kind of a newbie at doing this.


----------



## linklight (Mar 9, 2014)

bruwill said:


> Just purchased the RaceFace 22/32 chainring set. Will I have to take out a couple of links in the stock chain, or will it work as is? Kind of a newbie at doing this.


I removed some links when I went to a 32/22 chainring. I threaded the chain around the big ring and largest rear cog bypassing the rear derailleur and added 2 links to determine the correct chain length.

I also had to remove the crank arm to install the 22T chain ring.


----------



## blowery (Aug 28, 2014)

linklight said:


> I removed some links when I went to a 32/22 chainring. I threaded the chain around the big ring and largest rear cog bypassing the rear derailleur and added 2 links to determine the correct chain length.
> 
> I also had to remove the crank arm to install the 22T chain ring.


x2 to everything said.
32/22 is a much better setup.


----------



## 9.8m/s/s (Sep 26, 2005)

This thread is overwhelmingly 2.0 based. Has anyone here run the specs and found they preferred the 1.0 vs the 2.0? I've got a 2015 1.0 on the way and I saw a number of strong points I haven't seen anyone bring up- 1) $150 cheaper at the-house. 2) Weight listed is about 1.5lbs lighter 3) Single ring up front- I would have switched out the double anyway 4) Better stand over 5) Longer top tube- I sized down, and bought the extra wheelset. I figure I can ride it with a short stem and maybe squish fork on the trails, while being able to swap stem/ fork/ wheels for a cross bike like feel pulling a kid trailer and commuting 6) Tires- planned to switch those either way 7) Brakes- same


Maybe I'm hoping for too much. It arrives Monday (finger crossed) and I'll give impressions them.


----------



## Kawidan (Sep 13, 2010)

9.8m/s/s said:


> This thread is overwhelmingly 2.0 based. Has anyone here run the specs and found they preferred the 1.0 vs the 2.0? I've got a 2015 1.0 on the way and I saw a number of strong points I haven't seen anyone bring up- 1) $150 cheaper at the-house. 2) Weight listed is about 1.5lbs lighter 3) Single ring up front- I would have switched out the double anyway 4) Better stand over 5) Longer top tube- I sized down, and bought the extra wheelset. I figure I can ride it with a short stem and maybe squish fork on the trails, while being able to swap stem/ fork/ wheels for a cross bike like feel pulling a kid trailer and commuting 6) Tires- planned to switch those either way 7) Brakes- same
> 
> Maybe I'm hoping for too much. It arrives Monday (finger crossed) and I'll give impressions them.


If you are on Facebook go check out the owners's group. There are a lot of happy 1.0 owners on there and can give you a lot of feedback on the bike. They all seem very happy with their choices.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/691226087566074/


----------



## dariusf (Oct 8, 2012)

I'm sorry if this was already covered in the thread. I have 3.0 and looking to add studded tires. Just way too much ice on the trails here in Chicago burbs.

Anyone fitted the VEE Studded Snowshoe XL which is 4.8 wide?

I was going to get VEE Snowshoe 4.5 and install my own studs but its much more economical to buy the ready made XL. Assuming the XL will fit.

Snowshoe XL | VEE Tire Co.

Thanks!


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

Longtime MTBRer but newbie to the fatbike board here. I just relocated to Minnesota from Oregon a couple months ago. I've been scraping by on my Vulture 29"er with a Knard in the front and a 2.5" WTB Dissent in back, but admittedly that's sometimes been pretty difficult even with the very low snowpack we have here. So today I finally got myself a fattie.



9.8m/s/s said:


> This thread is overwhelmingly 2.0 based. Has anyone here run the specs and found they preferred the 1.0 vs the 2.0?


Funny you should say that. My thinking has been similar. I don't really need the 2x gearing, and the $150 price difference is a significant chunk of change to me. I went over the The House today and test rode both the 1.0 and 2.0. Going in I wasn't sure which bike I would get. Given the different geometries I wanted to get whichever one felt better under me regardless of the gearing (which can be changed) or a $150 difference.

But honestly, just riding around I didn't notice enough difference in handling between the 15" 1.0 and the 16" 2.0 to matter. So given that, I was happy to let the lower price/weight/complexity of the 1.0 break the tie, and I bought a 1.0 in black/red. Even better, they gave me $50 off for taking the floor model. AND! While they were tuning it up for me they noticed the brakes were shot, so they upgraded me to BB7s for free. Couldn't be happier than to have a fatbike with BB7s for $700, and the customer service there was fantastic.

Now to get out and ride it. I missed a good chunk of this morning at work so I need to wait until tomorrow. But _hopefully_ by then we will finally have some fresh snow again. Or maybe it will pass just to the north or south of us _again_, as it has done practically once a week since I got here.  Either way, looking forward to getting out on it tomorrow.


----------



## 9.8m/s/s (Sep 26, 2005)

Awesome to hear! I got mine about a week ago. I got the 15in as well. I knew I wanted a short stem and longer top tube, so the sizing worked. Over the first few rides it's been great. I rode with someone with a higher end Gravity on Saturday and I was very happy I went with the MN 1.0. 

Framed seems to have put the money into core parts and skimped on the stuff they figure people would switch out anyway. The X4 shifting isn't amazing, but better than expected. Tires are heavy but have a ton of traction in the snow. I'll leave those for now and replace as needed. Stem, seat, pedals, handlebars are all personal preference I knew I'd be swapping out no matter what. 



Cons? Only one. The 175mm cranks it was spec'd with. Who spec's 175mm cranks on a 15in? 99% of 16in bikes I've seen/ridden/bought come with 170's. I'd toss it up to Framed buying in bulk, but they spec 170's on their women's 15in 2.0. The-house and Framed both said they couldn't help me with swapping them out. Luckily I was able to find someone with a take off set from another build, but it's one extra expense I wasn't counting on. 

But, honestly at this level, one extra part to swap is way ahead of the game as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

Well, fortunately square taper cranks are VERY cheap to swap out! Guess I've always had 175mm cranks on my mountain bikes (170s on my road/'cross bikes), but I guess it is kind of strange, especially considering they highlight 170 cranks as one of the benefits of the Women's versions. You'd think it should be based on rider size and not gender. (FWIW I actually did take a close look at the "Women's" model and would have seriously considered it if I'd decided I wanted 170s. I like the purple.)


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

dariusf said:


> I'm sorry if this was already covered in the thread. I have 3.0 and looking to add studded tires. Just way too much ice on the trails here in Chicago burbs.
> 
> Anyone fitted the VEE Studded Snowshoe XL which is 4.8 wide?
> 
> ...


I'm pretty sure it would NOT fit between the chainstays. There is definitely a bit of extra space with the 4.0 Minnesota tire in there, and you could probably go up to at least a 4.25, but I'm sure a 4.8 is a no-go.

It would, however, fit in the front without any problem at all. If your goal is to do a lot of riding on sheets of ice you need studded tires front and rear. But if your goal, like mine, is to avoid falling on the occasional icy patch under the hardpack (been a lot of that in MN this winter with the thaws and lack of snowpack), then a front may be all you need. There were a few times on today's inaugural ride where I would have appreciated the traction of studs in front. I did buy a Vanhelga yesterday, because some say the siping helps improve grip on ice, but if that doesn't cut it I'll be looking at that Snowshoe XL myself.


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

Oops, I just re-read your post and saw that you have a 3.0. You might check on the Minnesota 3.0 discussion (separate thread), but I would think it should fit in both the front and rear. I believe the only difference between the standard 3.0 and the XWT 3.0 is the tires, and the XWT comes with 4.8s.


----------



## AaronDavis (Mar 3, 2015)

So here I am, looking to choose between the motobecane Boris or the framed Minnesota 2.0. The more I thought about it the more I started thinking maybe just go with the 1.0 since I will either 1. Upgrade the components or B. (  ) sell it and upgrade the bike anyways if I love fatties enough. It sounds like there is a lot of 1.0 love out there. What ya rek, then? Opinions? Is the 2.0 significantly ( by this I mean $150 ) better? Thoughts on Motobecane?


----------



## AaronDavis (Mar 3, 2015)

Tell me what your impressions are on the wheelset? This is exactly what I'm thinking of doing, go 1.0 and wheelset plus assembly and shipping all for under price of the 2.0


----------



## blowery (Aug 28, 2014)

AaronDavis said:


> Tell me what your impressions are on the wheelset? This is exactly what I'm thinking of doing, go 1.0 and wheelset plus assembly and shipping all for under price of the 2.0


I have the 2.0 and have yet to use the 29er wheel set, doubt I will. So aside from that wheel set, there are a few main differences:

obviously 2x10 vs 1x10
1.0 is 11/32 Sram X4 2.0 is 11/34 Sram X5 X7 shifters
Different pedals
Different geometry.

If you are upgrading the differences then no point in going to the 2.0. If you would use the wheel set and 2x10 then you are getting slightly better specs for your money.


----------



## 9.8m/s/s (Sep 26, 2005)

I haven't gotten on the extra wheelset yet (they are actually still in the box in my basement), but three uses came to mind when looking at them- 1) We get a nasty mud season around here. It's usually only a few weeks, but with all the snow we've had I'm guessing this year will be much worse. We do have some gravel roads though, so I'm looking forward to putting in some base miles on the other wheels, while still having the option to jump off the odd curb here and there. 2) Kid carrier- wife and I just had a kid, so making this my rail trail bike takes the stresses of pulling around a trailer off either my main roadie or my trail bike. 3) Hauling tools into the woods for work days. Again, great hauler. (Come to think of it, the fat tires might work well here too).

All three give me the idea that I'll appreciate the more stretched out geometry of the 1. If I'm feeling extra ambitious I can even put the stock stem back on for a much more gravel grinder feel.


----------



## 9.8m/s/s (Sep 26, 2005)

Anyone know the weight difference between the folding bead tires on the 2.0 and the wire bead on the 1.0? I'm imagining I could drop some weight there pretty easily.

Edit- looks like the folding 120tpi are around 1330g. If no one knows the weight of the wires off- hand I may break down and weight them myself in the next few days. For science.


----------



## Cycle Nomad (Aug 30, 2005)

About the Boris, it may come with Vee Mission tires which are not good..plenty of problems with them (just ask around) The Boris also has a Cro-Mo steel fork, the Framed has aluminum.
A friend rides the Boris, I ride the Framed Minn 2.0 both are decent first Fatbikes and a lot of fun. The Boris is a little heavier and he spent more than $220 to buy other tires for the snow. The framed come with their own framed 4 tires which have been really decent in all conditions.


----------



## Goodwoodz (Dec 10, 2008)

9.8m/s/s said:


> Anyone know the weight difference between the folding bead tires on the 2.0 and the wire bead on the 1.0? I'm imagining I could drop some weight there pretty easily.
> 
> Edit- looks like the folding 120tpi are around 1330g. If no one knows the weight of the wires off- hand I may break down and weight them myself in the next few days. For science.


I have the 2014 1.0....spec'd slightly different stock, has x5 derailer/shifter and 33t chainring. My stock mission vees weighed Front 1505g, rear 1580g. My tubes were also heavy, front 442g rear 482g. Easy to save some weight with mininal cost or effort.


----------



## blowery (Aug 28, 2014)

What is a good crankset upgrade that would work with the 2.0? My square taper are a bit flexy for me but I just don't know enough to make sure I get the correct setup.

I"m looking at:

Raceface Turbine
Raceface Cinch
Sram

What other things do I need to make sure it matches up correctly? 100mm BB? what else?


----------



## MTBLoCo29 (Feb 13, 2013)

Very happy with the Turbines. They have two fat bike versions, both are for 100mm BB, but have different spindle lengths and spacers for 170 or 190 rear wheels. The 2.0 has the 170 rear wheel. I bought them as just crank arms and BB, used my existing chainrings and bash guard.


----------



## KinneyKat (Mar 22, 2015)

Well, I jumped on the Fat Tire wagon and bought a 2.O! Stopped at the House last week and they had a demo bike for sale and after much debating I bought it! I got a pretty decent deal on it. There are alot of choices out there and I decided to try the 2.0 because of the price and I will be able to try the world of Fat Biking at a decent price. I am Ready to ride!:thumbsup:


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

That's exactly how I got my 2 .0 last September, KinneyKat. Stop by to have a look see, a wrong size web order had been returned, I walked out with a great deal. You'll love it!


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

I am waiting on my 2.0 silver/blue to show up, 20", 6'3" ish, monkey arms, currently ride an XL Specialized Camber Comp 29er. I also ordered the Fattie Slims, if for nothing else than the name themselves. I also ordered some Dually rims and would like to have my LBS switch the rims out for me. I have some 29x3.0's Vidars kicking around I want to try out and will let everyone know how fitment goes.

Are the hubs on the Fattie Slims decent enough to do this with? I've already grabbed a bunch of other upgrades for it, just need to wait for everything to show up. Maine winter is ending quickly, although we got some Easter snow today. Should be here Thursday, and I work Monday-Wednesday 12hr shifts, so the rest of the week is mine! I haven't been this excited about a bike in a long long time....

Few hours well spent reading this entire thread!!


----------



## KinneyKat (Mar 22, 2015)

Enjoy the new bike shmtastic! The silver/blue combo was my favorite... that is a sweet looking bike!


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

I'm bouncing back and forth between the 2.0 womens or a Fatboy for my wife.
I see lots of people upgrading their 2.0's to the extent that they'd pretty much be in the realm of a more expensive bike anyways.

So I'm trying to figure if the stock bike, plus maybe $200 in upgrades will pencil out.
Reading reviews, seems the girls are pretty happy with 2.0.


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

Gambit21 said:


> I'm bouncing back and forth between the 2.0 womens or a Fatboy for my wife.
> I see lots of people upgrading their 2.0's to the extent that they'd pretty much be in the realm of a
> 
> So I'm trying to figure if the stock bike, plus maybe $200 in upgrades will pencil out.
> Reading reviews, seems the girls are pretty happy with 2.0.


You'll get better and quicker responses at the Framed Minnesota Fat Bike group on Facebook.


----------



## jhammer221 (Feb 17, 2008)

shmtastic said:


> I am waiting on my 2.0 silver/blue to show up, 20", 6'3" ish, monkey arms, currently ride an XL Specialized Camber Comp 29er. I also ordered the Fattie Slims, if for nothing else than the name themselves. I also ordered some Dually rims and would like to have my LBS switch the rims out for me. I have some 29x3.0's Vidars kicking around I want to try out and will let everyone know how fitment goes.
> 
> Are the hubs on the Fattie Slims decent enough to do this with? I've already grabbed a bunch of other upgrades for it, just need to wait for everything to show up. Maine winter is ending quickly, although we got some Easter snow today. Should be here Thursday, and I work Monday-Wednesday 12hr shifts, so the rest of the week is mine! I haven't been this excited about a bike in a long long time....
> 
> Few hours well spent reading this entire thread!!


Let us know how this fits. I am a bit taller than you with long arms as well and concerned with the short ETT. Seems like it might be cramped. I'm right under 6'4" with 37 dress shirt and 36" cycling inseam roughly.


----------



## blowery (Aug 28, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> I'm bouncing back and forth between the 2.0 womens or a Fatboy for my wife.
> I see lots of people upgrading their 2.0's to the extent that they'd pretty much be in the realm of a
> 
> So I'm trying to figure if the stock bike, plus maybe $200 in upgrades will pencil out.
> Reading reviews, seems the girls are pretty happy with 2.0.


In my opinion one of the biggest problems of the 2.0 was the gearing and tires. Now the Framed tires are WAY better than the missions thats used to come on them so that isn't a needed upgrade. The chainrings can cheaply be resolved and the stem/bars/saddle will probably be changed on any bike. Next thing would be the rims, Mulefuts can be had for under $300 a pair and get you tubeless without "ghetto" setup on the Weinmann HL80 rims.

The cheapest Fatboy I have seen is $1500 for the SE which is $600 more than the 2.0 (unless you are getting LBS deal)


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

Yeah I'm leaning more and more toward the Framed for my wife. Pretty much the same kit as the $1800 Mukluk - pretty impressive. Room to change the brakes and maybe the bars. Thanks for the Mulefuts tip too...but then see just with those rims I'm getting close to Fatboy territory. That's what I mean. That base Fatboy is a pretty good price considering the upgrades I see going into the 2.0.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

...oh, and why do the rims need to be upgraded? Weight?
Part of the attraction of the women's model is the purple rims.
I'd consider lacing those hoops to better hubs down the road for her if the're up to snuff.

Edit - reading earlier posts, I'm guessing it's width.


----------



## PerraHunter (Nov 3, 2013)

Regarding upgrades, aside from changing parts to customize the fit to the individual rider, some people just like tinkering and building up their perfect bike. There are tons of us riding the original 1.0 and 2.0 with minimal changes, and are perfectly happy.

The Framed 1.0 and 2.0 are not race bikes out of the box, so a lot of people have upgraded them for that purpose. But if you are more of an adventure/recreational rider, you may not need to upgrade at all. 

For my 1st shipment 2.0, I changed the pedals from a bike I was not riding, and ditto the seat (zero $ each). I changed the small chain ring for easier hill climbing ($21 part and tool). I added a dropper post ($110) because, well, who wouldn't. On-One Mary bars for $29 for comfort and fit. So, $160 on upgrades. Hardly what you would call extravagant. Add another hundred for replacing stuff I broke.

Here is my take on it; if you enjoy that sort of thing, the 1.0 and 2.0 are great platforms to build up your perfect bike, but if you just like riding, these bikes are ready to ride straight from the box. 

Ps. Forgot to mention the On-One floaters, to replace the worn down 
Vee Missions. Obviously, Your Mileage May Vary.


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

PerraHunter said:


> Regarding upgrades, aside from changing parts to customize the fit to the individual rider, some people just like tinkering and building up their perfect bike. There are tons of us riding the original 1.0 and 2.0 with minimal changes, and are perfectly happy.
> 
> The Framed 1.0 and 2.0 are not race bikes out of the box, so a lot of people have upgraded them for that purpose. But if you are more of an adventure/recreational rider, you may not need to upgrade at all.
> 
> ...


Agree completely with this. I'm a tinkerer as well. I got my 2.0 directly through the House when I walked in out of curiosity and there was a wrong size web purchase return for $700. It walked out with me. I've changed out shifters (Sram X0), grips (Ergon GS1) and rear derailleur (Sram X9), and I'm using a Brooks and pedals I had on hand. I bought an On One Fatty Carbon Fork that I'll be installing when I have time, as the existing fork is the only part of the original "base" I don't really care for. I also upgraded to Floaters, about the best thing out there for the cost. It's good as is and fun to work with.


----------



## blowery (Aug 28, 2014)

Gambit21 said:


> ...oh, and why do the rims need to be upgraded? Weight?
> Part of the attraction of the women's model is the purple rims.
> I'd consider lacing those hoops to better hubs down the road for her if the're up to snuff.
> 
> Edit - reading earlier posts, I'm guessing it's width.


It's basically that they suck for tubeless. There isn't anything "wrong" with Weinmann HL80 rims. They are a little heavy and are a pain for tubeless but the rims hold up.

The fatboy SE is a good bike but the 3.0 might be a more "comparable" bike. 3.0 has better components/brakes, but same 190mm, 150mm front tapered for bluto. With Mulefuts tubeless rims for under $300 you would come out still under the price of the Fatboy SE and could sell your old rims to offset some of that price or just run 2 wheel sets/ one studded for winter.


----------



## Gambit21 (Feb 6, 2015)

OK - sounding like a solid plan for her.


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

As for upgrades, I dont' even have my bike on hand and I'm already looking at changing the crankset ontop of everything else I've ordered. Is there anything wrong with the crank arms or bb? No, but I just dont' like square taper bb's, too difficult to work on, can't work on them as easily. Doesn't mean there is a single thing wrong with it, just not for me. 

I bought some new chainrings, 24 and 32, then the next day, after sleeping on it, ordered a 32 NW, that way it'd be similar to my FS bike. Never know what you are going to do, but I just will do anything to tinker and make it my own. No ones Minnesota 2.0 will be quite like mine.

shm


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

shmtastic said:


> As for upgrades, I dont' even have my bike on hand and I'm already looking at changing the crankset ontop of everything else I've ordered. Is there anything wrong with the crank arms or bb? No, but I just dont' like square taper bb's, too difficult to work on, can't work on them as easily. Doesn't mean there is a single thing wrong with it, just not for me.
> 
> I bought some new chainrings, 24 and 32, then the next day, after sleeping on it, ordered a 32 NW, that way it'd be similar to my FS bike. Never know what you are going to do, but I just will do anything to tinker and make it my own. No ones Minnesota 2.0 will be quite like mine.
> 
> shm


Cup and cone square taper bb require some expertise, but sealed bearing square taper bb are no more difficult than and every bit as good as other types.


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

revcp said:


> Cup and cone square taper bb require some expertise, but sealed bearing square taper bb are no more difficult than and every bit as good as other types.


They are awfully heavy and in order to remove the crankarm, you need to use your square taper crank arm removal tool each time. I don't want to have to carry that with me on every ride just on the offhand chance I need to remove the crank arm for a stuck chain. I've never had that issue, but I have helped out others on the trail with that problem before, and I don't want to have to torque my chain to reef it out of there.

And once again, just personal preference. I don't like them. If I choose to keep the 24t inner chain ring, you can't remove it without pulling the arm. Thats my reasoning behind it. Just my thoughts though. Bike will show up today. Can't wait!!

I plan on putting my 3.0 tires on the fattie slims just to take some pictures before hand, that way it can be documented before and after the Dually's. They show up Monday, so hopefully late next week I'll have the wheelset rebuilt and can share that experience as well

SHM


----------



## MUSTCLIME (Jan 26, 2004)

Gambit21 said:


> Yeah I'm leaning more and more toward the Framed for my wife. Pretty much the same kit as the $1800 Mukluk - pretty impressive. Room to change the brakes and maybe the bars. Thanks for the Mulefuts tip too...but then see just with those rims I'm getting close to Fatboy territory. That's what I mean. That base Fatboy is a pretty good price considering the upgrades I see going into the 2.0.


FYI....the 1.0 and 2.0 have high top tubes....watch you stand over or there will be sadness.


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

jhammer221 said:


> Let us know how this fits. I am a bit taller than you with long arms as well and concerned with the short ETT. Seems like it might be cramped. I'm right under 6'4" with 37 dress shirt and 36" cycling inseam roughly.


I'm not entirely sure how to measure properly to give you a comparable cycling inseam, but after a quick 15 minutes to build the bike, and a two minute midnight test ride, I will say that wearing jeans, the standover is just barely enough with shoes on. When I bike, I wear spandex style shorts. Tonight I did not have them on. I'll be able to answer this a bit better in the next few days, after actually riding the bike, rather then just spinning down the street and back.

I will say that I was a bit disappointed. The seat post screw was not included, and a cable tab was missing from the fork. On top of that, the authorized dealer that I bought the bike from said that the fattie slims were 32h and after a few dozen counts, the rims/hubs are 36h. I'm not overly happy about this. I'm not taking the zip ties off the wheelset yet, until I hear what the dealer wants to do.

I LOVE the pavement ride sound though, I will say that. Reminds me of a jeep I had with oversized tires. Love that sound. Will update more very soon.


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

Mounted up the 29+ on the fattie slim wheel. I was told by Framed that they were 30mm wheels. It is actually 18.4mm internally, 24.6ish external.. Not sure where 30mm came from. Here are the pics though.


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

shmtastic said:


> Mounted up the 29+ on the fattie slim wheel. I was told by Framed that they were 30mm wheels. It is actually 18.4mm internally, 24.6ish external.. Not sure where 30mm came from. Here are the pics though.
> 
> View attachment 980006
> 
> ...


What 29+ tires are those? How do they ride? I have a set of fatty slims still in the box from my 2015 2.0. I never messed with them because I was have too much fun with the fat tires. Your pictures are making me think some more.

Take care,

Mike


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

MPE said:


> What 29+ tires are those? How do they ride? I have a set of fatty slims still in the box from my 2015 2.0. I never messed with them because I was have too much fun with the fat tires. Your pictures are making me think some more.
> 
> Take care,
> 
> Mike


They are just Innova Gravity Vadar's. I just got my 2.0 last night, had a trip today so I only put 4 miles on the fat tires on pavement. Going to be testing both out off road tomorrow. I picked the tires up on amazon for 35$ with tubes. They are sold out right now though. Only added 4 ounces, I repeat, 4 ounces, from the stock fattie slims.

Just an added note, my rotors didn't come with bolts, going to pick them up tomorrow morning before I go riding. Will post pictures also all put together.

Shm


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

So its a cold, rainy/misty day here, currently around 36 degrees, so I'm not going to get to go out and ride, but I did take some pictures with the fatty slims with Innova Vidar 29x3.0 tires on them. Haven't got to ride them yet, and they do have a bit more air in them then I will ride, but oh well. At least its something to look at? Hopefully will get to ride them tomorrow.


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

Minnesota 2.0 (2014) headset question. I'm upgrading the original Neco. I was advised to buy the Cane Creek IS42 Tall Complete (42mm top and bottom head tube diameter) and it's not compatible. It appears the MN 2.0 IS A semi Integrated headset and not fully so. The IS42 is for a fully integrated headset. What has worked for others? Particularly interested in the Cane Creek 40 series.


----------



## Triggsie (Jan 12, 2012)

Headsets are usually the last thing people upgrade, so I doubt people have done it. Have you tried measuring the frame and using Cane Creek's headset finder?
Headset Fit Finder | Cane Creek Cycling Components


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

Triggsie said:


> Headsets are usually the last thing people upgrade, so I doubt people have done it. Have you tried measuring the frame and using Cane Creek's headset finder?
> Headset Fit Finder | Cane Creek Cycling Components


Thanks. Got the answer from the FB site. For anyone else who's curious, it's a ZS44, tall.


----------



## MPE (Dec 3, 2013)

shmtastic said:


> So its a cold, rainy/misty day here, currently around 36 degrees, so I'm not going to get to go out and ride, but I did take some pictures with the fatty slims with Innova Vidar 29x3.0 tires on them. Haven't got to ride them yet, and they do have a bit more air in them then I will ride, but oh well. At least its something to look at? Hopefully will get to ride them tomorrow.
> 
> View attachment 980121
> 
> ...


How did they ride? Do they work / ride well on the fattie slims? I have a set of fattie slims sitting in the box, but if those 29x3.0 tires work, I might get them out and set up. Ride report please!

Thanks and take care,
Mike


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

Hey Mike, I got a bad set of Fattie Slims. I only got about half a mile on them. I believe the hubs suffered from the slightly oversized bearings. Felt like rocks in the rear end. I already have the Dually's and my BHS hubs should be here tomorrow, then off to the LBS to get built up with proper 29+ wheels. 

On a side note, the tires seemed to grip well for the price. Hopefully next week I'll get on them and I'm sure there'll be even less snow. Right now, its the mud/ice season here. I took a decent digger today trying to ride a trail that had mealy snow and ice on it. Had my tires inflated more than I plan on using for snow, going too fast, all sorts of bad juju combined to me eating it.

The Innova's only mic'd out to be about 2.79"ish, so not a true 3.0 either. 18ish mm inner width may have had something to do with that. I'll be attempting to go tubeless with these, wire bead, never know 'til ya try!

SHM


----------



## cal21guy (Mar 23, 2014)

Would you be so kind as to provide a link to a 32/22T and bash that you used? Thanks - newb with 2.2 on order.



linklight said:


> Chainrings - I originally thought that the 38/28T gearing was fine and I could have probably lived with it. Going to a 32/22T chainring gave me 2 extra low gears and I only gave up one tall gear. Sounds like a good trade off to me. I never used the tallest cog on the rear cassette anyways. I had to remove 2 links from the chain and I had to remove the crank arm to replace the small chainring. The crank arm was super tight and I had a hard time getting it off.


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

cal21guy said:


> Would you be so kind as to provide a link to a 32/22T and bash that you used? Thanks - newb with 2.2 on order.


Any with the BDC of 104 and 64mm will work. Bashguard will need to be 104BDC, which is pretty standard for 2nd and 3rd chain rings, as will the 32T. The 22T will be the 64BDC, which will be your granny gear.

Be careful removing your crank arm, mine was on tight enough that the crank removal tool actually stripped the threads. In order to get it off, I literally had to cut off the square taper attachment with a cut off disk on a grinder and replace with a Raceface XC, then did away with the front derailleur all together, 32T NW up front.

Rides great with my 29+ set up. A bit jealous of the 2.2, as I got the 2015 2.0. Would have changed things, but oh well.


----------



## cal21guy (Mar 23, 2014)

Again, please don't shoot the newb here, but I can't find a Jenson or Amazon anywhere to buy just a 32 104mm and 22 64mm chainring. I was hoping to find anodized green to match the wheels on the Mn2.2, but at this point will be happy with anything! Please provide link??

Thankfully, LBS happy to remove crank and swap for minimal $10 labor cost.


----------



## cal21guy (Mar 23, 2014)

Update:

would these work?

RaceFace "single narrow wide chainring, 32tooth" Race Face Single Narrow Wide Chainring > Components > Drivetrain, Brakes and Pedals > Chainrings | Jenson USA

and

"Truativ x.9 & x.10 10spd chainring 22t, 64mm BCD"
Truvativ X.9 & X.0 10SPD Chainring > Components > Drivetrain, Brakes and Pedals > Chainrings | Jenson USA


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

Hey no problem man. If you look at the pull down tab on the right of the page, you will see a 22t and a 32t, and this was just the first that I pulled up. There are many, many options out there.

Shimano XT M770 Series Chainring > Components > Drivetrain, Brakes and Pedals > Chainrings | Jenson USA


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

Narrow wide rings are only for 1x riding. The only way that could work is if you ghost granny geared the 22t 64bdc, which would mean no front derailleur, and if you wanted to use your small ring you have to stop, reach down and manually lift it off the NW and onto the granny. 

There are no shift ramps on a NW and the way a narrow wide works means you're chain has to set on the chain ring a certain way, which is why you don't see odd numbered teeth on a NW. 

Hopefully that answers your question. Remember to add a new post, not modify an old one if you want quicker responses, just a tid bit of info, hope this all helps.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## 9.8m/s/s (Sep 26, 2005)

shmtastic said:


> Narrow wide rings are only for 1x riding. The only way that could work is if you ghost granny geared the 22t 64bdc, which would mean no front derailleur, and if you wanted to use your small ring you have to stop, reach down and manually lift it off the NW and onto the granny.


I'm actually running that and it is more beneficial than you would think. With semi slicks on the fatty slims, I run a main narrow wide gear of 36t in front which takes care of roads and doubletrack/ buff singletrack, and I keep a bailout 22t. Haven't had to use it much, but happy it's there. And when I hop back on the road/ get to the top its easy enough to stop for a second and switch.


----------



## GNfanatic (Oct 15, 2004)

guys, help me out here. Got my 2.0, checked everything and went for a ride. I got the 18in ver (I am 5'11). Tires are at 20 psi , I rode on pavement, this is my first fatty.

1-) my freaking hands got numb, Need better grips. Not sure which ones though?
2-) I feel a little tight on this bike, would like to get a longer stem and riser bars. but what size stem?100mm?) and what width bars?
3-) those little fenders help?? I don't want to get the massive ones. I am shocked how much crap fat tires pick up. lol

thanks!


----------



## shmtastic (Aug 10, 2014)

Hey there, hopefully you have this all figured out, but just in case, I have the 20" and an around 6'3" with long arms. I ride with the seat back as far as I can without a set back post, 60mm RF stem and Answer 2" riser, 720mm bars. I push the sweep quite a bit forward, and absolutely love it. 

I run 40mm and 760 spank riser bars on my full squish XL and it rides line a dream. Haven't found the ideal grips yet, so can't help there. I believe I have some standard checkered On One grips on my Minny.



Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------



## Cold Trigger Finger (Aug 4, 2015)

I'm planning on getting either a 2.0 or the 3.0 this Saturday. Lord Willing! It mostly depends on if the lbs has my size in stock. I'm not leaving town without a fat bike!! Its 200 miles from my house to the Framed dealer 1 way. My 1st alteration will b a 22 tooth front chainring.
One question I have that I haven't seen on this thread yet. What racks can I put on the 2.0 ? And does anyone know if the 3.0+2.0 are set up to take the same racks?


----------



## NintendoGeneration (Jul 7, 2015)

Cold Trigger Finger said:


> I'm planning on getting either a 2.0 or the 3.0 this Saturday. Lord Willing! It mostly depends on if the lbs has my size in stock. I'm not leaving town without a fat bike!! Its 200 miles from my house to the Framed dealer 1 way. My 1st alteration will b a 22 tooth front chainring.
> One question I have that I haven't seen on this thread yet. What racks can I put on the 2.0 ? And does anyone know if the 3.0+2.0 are set up to take the same racks?


I have a 2015 2.0 and the Topeak Explorer 29er w/Disc mounts fits like a charm


----------



## Cold Trigger Finger (Aug 4, 2015)

Thank you.


----------



## revcp (Jun 21, 2007)

Cold Trigger Finger said:


> I'm planning on getting either a 2.0 or the 3.0 this Saturday. Lord Willing! It mostly depends on if the lbs has my size in stock. I'm not leaving town without a fat bike!! Its 200 miles from my house to the Framed dealer 1 way. My 1st alteration will b a 22 tooth front chainring.
> One question I have that I haven't seen on this thread yet. What racks can I put on the 2.0 ? And does anyone know if the 3.0+2.0 are set up to take the same racks?


I have the 2.0. I have an Old Man Mountain Sherpa rack on the back. Very solid.

Sent from my 0PJA2 using Tapatalk


----------



## burnhamish (Sep 4, 2014)

I have a 2015 2.0 and installed an Ibera rack (disc mount). It is much less expensive than OMM but still pretty sturdy. You may have to come up with your own adapters to make it fit.


----------



## Cold Trigger Finger (Aug 4, 2015)

I went to the Framed dealer when I was in town and he didn't show up. Start up dealer. 
We got a Boris from Craigslist. And I have my eye on a KHS. 
The framed dealer should have some Alaskans instock in my size so I may still get one and the 3.0 is still in the running.


----------



## Flash (Jan 30, 2004)

I have the 2.0 with the orange wheels. I'm looking to trade for for another color wheelset if anyone in Michigan wants to trade.


----------



## dbhammercycle (Nov 15, 2011)

I purchased a 2.2 a couple days ago. Swapped out parts and upgraded to BB7s. After some tinkering and attempts at setting the pad clearance I noticed that the insertion/removal tabs on the brake pads hit the welded mounting bracket. It didn't hit by much, but it took me longer than it should to notice it. The fix is to cut off/down the tab on the left side pad. This is for the 150mm thru axle alloy fork although it could be an issue on carbon fork as well. If you have purchased a 3.0 this was already done for you.







The guys at the House have been very helpful, so thanks to Chris for the fix and Dylan for the patience and time it took to get me to jump. First new bike in a few years. I haven't ridden the bike other than in the lot, but I'm looking forward to some easier winter biking.


----------



## Fleas (Jan 19, 2006)

*If it ain't broke...*

Oh wait. It's broke.

I don't know this guy. He's not a large person but seemed to be a good pedaler. He rode up one large step and this happened. It was not a noteworthy impact.














What is not apparent in the pix is that, while the right CS is cracked, the left CS buckled a little (maybe from chain tension/pedal forces).

Of course I don't know any history on the bike or the guy. He was a short walk from the bar so he was OK. 
I'm trying to follow up with him to see if it was a warranty or what he decided to do.
Maybe check your chain stays/rear triangle.

-F

PS - obviously, he didn't come here to complain so maybe he's been mean to it lo these many months.


----------



## dbhammercycle (Nov 15, 2011)

Warranty is 3 years for the frameset. This has happened before (same spot), but I only know that because of an earlier post in this thread.


----------



## Kleebs (Mar 18, 2014)

Fleas said:


> Oh wait. It's broke.
> 
> I don't know this guy. He's not a large person but seemed to be a good pedaler. He rode up one large step and this happened. It was not a noteworthy impact.
> View attachment 1040887
> ...


Boy that bike looks familiar 

That is my bike. I admit that I have never babied my Minnesota 2.0, but I also don't abuse it anymore than what should be expected from a fat bike or any other mountain bike. It has seen a fair share of riding down stairs, trips to Ray's, and some cross races (fat bike class). Nothing that I would expect to weaken the frame. I think it was just my massive quads that did the frame in 

Honestly, I'm not in a bad mood about it because Framed has been pretty cool about the whole thing. As dbhammercycle mentioned, the frame warranty is 3 years and they were super upfront about replacing it. I just have to pick a new color frame because they were out of the silver (not a big deal).


----------



## blowery (Aug 28, 2014)

Good customer service. Nice to see a manufacture stick to the warranty and not look for a reason to deny it.


----------



## Fleas (Jan 19, 2006)

Kleebs said:


> Boy that bike looks familiar
> 
> That is my bike. I admit that I have never babied my Minnesota 2.0, but I also don't abuse it anymore than what should be expected from a fat bike or any other mountain bike. It has seen a fair share of riding down stairs, trips to Ray's, and some cross races (fat bike class). Nothing that I would expect to weaken the frame. I think it was just my massive quads that did the frame in
> 
> Honestly, I'm not in a bad mood about it because Framed has been pretty cool about the whole thing. As dbhammercycle mentioned, the frame warranty is 3 years and they were super upfront about replacing it. I just have to pick a new color frame because they were out of the silver (not a big deal).


Thanks for following up! Sorry that happened, but I'm glad it's working out. Sorry if I stole your thunder by posting. Hopefully we'll see the new one soon!

-F


----------



## dbhammercycle (Nov 15, 2011)

So, it would appear that my front wheel may be off center by 2mm. It's noticeable to me even though it may not be a big deal to others. Also, the mounts for a rack are off a bit. These kind of QC things were mentioned in a review so no real surprise. I've also noticed a couple of other things that were part of the first build (the top bolt of the stem was higher than the steer tube for example) I had when I swapped parts. I did have a frame swap because part of the top tube was lacking some paint under the clear coat. Granted, that's awesome they were cool and swapped it. Anybody else notice some of this stuff, is this just supposed to be acceptable because it's a fatty under 1K? 

I don't know if this has been talked about on the FB page, because I'm an FB holdout.

Followup: Fork swap, seems the fork was off, the hub didn't sit on the ledges for the thru axle dropouts so it wasn't straight and was too wide to boot. New fork doesn't have those issues. I'm going to ride the wheels a bit and have them trued and tensioned after 50miles or so, which is par for the course with new wheels. That said the dish is off to the disc side a little. Customer service has been great so far and I know they are interested and proactive in me being happy. Still, the issues I've been having, IMO, should be found and remedied prior to me being handed the bike. I'm sick with my son's latest and greatest virus, so I haven't ridden it since I got the bike back. Hopefully we'll get a warm up here in MN soon.


----------



## Scarfacef1 (Apr 21, 2012)

hi 6'0 about 195 - looks like most would recommend the 17" for the sake of the "jewels" - what I do want to know is how well will this (1.0) handle on trails with lots of rocks and roots etc, no suspension on the 1.0 and I'm worried about fork breaks, can't decided if I need to go with a front suspension FB like a Gravity Bullsye Monster Comp or one like this the Minnesota 1.0


----------



## tigris99 (Aug 26, 2012)

I'm 6'1 and no way I could ride smaller than a 19. 20/21 xl is what i ride and I have only a 33" inseam.


The "jewels" almost never at risk, if you hit then you have worse problems lol.
Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk


----------



## dbhammercycle (Nov 15, 2011)

@Scarface

You can get the MN 1.2 option which could come with the Bluto or Renegade. You could just call the guys at the House and see what your options are for upgrades or component spec. I have the MN 2.2 18", standover is tall for the toptube length. I would not skimp on the top tube length since the frames run shorter than other fatties for a more upright position. I don't know your pricepoint, but if you have 1K+ I think you might have options.


----------



## StevePodraza (Jun 29, 2006)

hello! looking at replacing my BB, I know its a 100mm , any advice on which one is best?

thank you!


----------



## powderturns (Jun 19, 2007)

Yetiski said:


> We are probably going to try a pair of Snowshoe tires on one. Looks like the rear will just clear but don't know if all gears will clear.


Very old, I know, but Yetiski, can I ask how you got in with this? Did they fit?


----------

