# Full suspension vs. fat bike



## Gofu (Nov 28, 2020)

Hi there. I am looking at doing the Kokopelli trail in between Moab and fruita in the spring as my first bikepacking trip. I am planning on riding it from Moab to fruita, then running the river back to Moab. I am trying to decide what type of bike to bring. I currently own a full suspension 29er (yeti sb130lr) and a fat bike I primarily use in the snow (specialized carbon fatboy). The fat bike is already partially set up to use for bike packing with a center frame bag and other mounting features that it came with when I bought it used, so I am really tempted to make it the dedicated summer desert bikepacking rig. The yeti has none of these things and I would be outfitting that bike from scratch, and honestly much heavier than the fatboy. I am concerned that the fat bike will not be able to handle the tougher sections of trail; I have not really ridden that bike on hard single track (that's what the yeti is for). If I was not looking at bikepacking I would opt for the full suspension yeti for the porcupine section of single track. Of course porcupine is not the only part of the trail, and maybe having those big tires on the fatbike would be helpful at other sections. If I took the fatboy I was thinking of getting 4" tires on it for dirt (instead of the 4.8" tires I run on snow). I was even playing with the idea of getting a front suspension fork on it to slacken out the geometry (currently 70.5 degrees stock). I also worry that the fatbike has a very light carbon frame and may not handle all the weight; a bunch of gear plus a 185 lbs man if and when the trail gets tough. I have seen pictures of fatbikes on the trail. So, full suspension vs. fatbike bikepacking. Suggestions? Let me know, thanks.


----------



## ericzamora (Dec 14, 2017)

I'm looking forward to reading suggestions from experienced riders, even at the bikepacking.com link i was going to send you, but now see you've found on your own.

I've never ridden in that area, nor do i have a FS or fat bike, but i'd choose the fat bike, not worry about it being carbon (unless you have serious concerns due to obvious physical damage you can see), and go with 27.5 x 3.8/4 wheels/tires, set up tubeless of course. Especially since it's "already partially set up" for bikepacking.

If i was doing it myself with my own options of bikes available, i'd go with my 29x3 rigid fork rig. And just walk the sketchy stuff.

eric/fresno, ca.


----------



## Jayem (Jul 16, 2005)

A fatbike is pretty harsh IME, but an FS bike is hard to pack gear on. Fatbikes in the summer are rigid bikes and ride like rigid bikes. That comes down more to the rider, are you ok with being on a rigid bike in that kind of terrain.


----------



## twodownzero (Dec 27, 2017)

I have ridden all sorts of rowdy terrain on my fat bike. It is not as steep as yours (68 degree head angle). I could certainly ride the ride you're suggesting on it, and I have ridden in both Fruita and Moab (but not my fat bike in either!). As another poster said, it's going to ride like a rigid bike. Given your choices, I'd ride the fat bike.

The carbon frame is not a concern. It is strong, perhaps much stronger than any metal bike depending on how measured.

If I had my stable of bikes, I'd use a 3" tire hardtail for the ride you're doing. I'd even consider buying one rather than building a wheelset for your fat bike and installing suspension fork, although that is an option. My 140 fork hardtail really is my do it all mountain bike (although not my first choice for much of anything).


----------



## Gofu (Nov 28, 2020)

Thanks all for the input. @twodownzero, those were exactly my thoughts as well. I have started to think about:1- putting a 120 suspension fork to lower the head tube angle (at the expense of adding a lot of weight, this thing is so LIGHT!), and 2- getting a 29x3” wheel set. Then it would be closer to the 68 degree hard tail you mentioned above. Of course the amount of money I would be spending on it then maybe I should sell it (even though I just bought it) and get something else. 

Thanks for everyone’s input! More to consider.


----------



## HerrKaLeu (Aug 18, 2017)

Jayem said:


> A fatbike is pretty harsh IME, but an FS bike is hard to pack gear on. Fatbikes in the summer are rigid bikes and ride like rigid bikes. That comes down more to the rider, are you ok with being on a rigid bike in that kind of terrain.


You are not wrong. but you can enhance the suppleness of a fatbike with good tires a LOT. the quality of the tires on a fatbike is everything. On a FS bike, you can get away with lesser tires.

I had Maxxis minions on my fatbike and started thinking about all kind of ideas up to buying a dedicated FS bike to get more comfort. then i upgraded to bud/Lou tires of same size and pressure, and the ride became very comfortable. no, it isn't like an FS bike now, but much more manageable. As a rule of thumb it seems a tire needs an MSPR of $120 to be good 

Also upgrading to better geometry and CF fork vs. steel helped somewhat. I'm not upgrading to larger wheels (larger overall diameter) and also hope for some better rollover.

Again, if you want really good single-track, an FS may be better. But don't dismiss a fatbike based on experience with a bad one with bad tires. I can't emphasize it enough, the quality of tires is very important.


----------



## connolm (Sep 12, 2009)

I've bikepacked with both Fat and FS. I preferred how the rigid Fatbike handled the load better than my FS. And the tires, at an appropriate pressure, can provide a degree of bump suppression. The FS just seemed more "floppy" loose. And the added weight seemed to Pogo the suspension despite raising the shock pressures.

Most FS designs I can think of severely limit or exclude the use of a frame bag. That forces the weight upward raising the center of gravity. And a saddle bag literally hangs off the back causing that "floppy" feeling along with a high center of gravity.

I'll try to find some pictures when I get home...

You'll be doing crazy climbing up out of Moab and toward the La Salles. Good luck! I'm a bit jealous. You'll definitely need to do a trip report when done - with pictures.


----------



## CObikeman (Nov 25, 2014)

I am just starting to learn about bikepacking and have similar questions - so I can't give you direct answers - but I can tell you how to make the Fatboy a better summer ride. I have a '15 alloy Fatboy. In winter I run 90mm Nextie carbon rims/DT 350 hubs with Bud/Lou 4.8. In suymmer I run 65mm Light Bicycle carbon rims with DT 350 hubs and 4.4 Jumbo Jims. All tubeless. The summer wheels et is pretty darn light - something like 2.5 lbs light than stock. I have a Bluto - 100mm travel - and I'm thinking hard about going 120mm. In its current configuration I did Fruita in Spring '19. Yes my FS bike (Pivot Mach 5.5) would have been better - but I really enjoyed riding the fatty- proved it was a good bike that could take anything on. In summer mode it's 28 lbs - with a Bluto don't forget. the dilemma I see is this: fat bike is slower rolling even with lighter wheels/summer tires and less comfortable. But it but should climb better being a hardtail, has more on-bike storage and is simpler - no rear shock to potentially fail.

Curious to hear more people weigh in.

Brandon
Denver


----------



## HerrKaLeu (Aug 18, 2017)

A FS for bike packing also will lack mounting points, and a large triangle. And fully loaded, you probably don't do riding that benefits from a suspension designed to do 5' jumps. 

If a fatbike is the right rigid bike, depends on the type of terrain. Desert and off-piste, sure. Typical pavement touring, you likely look at 29+ wheels. 

A more old-school geometry MAY work better for touring. Yes, it is worse for single track, but may be more comfortable riding horizontally for many hours. YMMV.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

I've ridden the Kokopelli a bunch of times. At least 5, maybe 6.

Given your choices I'd put a nice suspension fork on your fatbike, and add some 29 x 3" wheels/tires to it.

That way you still have decent rubber for the sandy sections, but not so much that it becomes a slog, and you don't lose the big frame bag.


----------



## rushman3 (Jan 24, 2009)

Another idea...track down a good used Trek Stache

29 x 3.00 tires, 120 fork, HT frame with lots of room.....


----------



## lentamentalisk (Jul 21, 2015)

HerrKaLeu said:


> And fully loaded, you probably don't do riding that benefits from a suspension designed to do 5' jumps.


I've been struggling with this one. I've got a full squish Salsa Horsethief and I like to shred. It has a reasonably big triangle that I put all my water in, but still, I find my bikepacking load to leave too much on my back to really enjoy jumps and drops. During the summer when I've got fewer layers and generally pack less redundancy, I can make it work, but in the shoulder seasons, as temps start dropping, it just isn't very fun to ride with all that weight on my back.

That said, I'm looking at getting an OMM rack to mount on the rear triangle. If I can even get just 3-5lbs off my back, that could make enough of a difference.

I'll also note that how much you can fit on your bike is HIGHLY dependent on how tall you are and how much travel and dropper you have. At 5'9", with a 29er, medium travel, and a substantial dropper, I've got just 2" between seat rails and tire. Meanwhile all those 6'5" giants out there riding 27.5 XC bikes still have room for a saddle bag.


----------



## MoShroom (Dec 2, 2020)

lentamentalisk said:


> I've been struggling with this one. I've got a full squish Salsa Horsethief and I like to shred. It has a reasonably big triangle that I put all my water in, but still, I find my bikepacking load to leave too much on my back to really enjoy jumps and drops. During the summer when I've got fewer layers and generally pack less redundancy, I can make it work, but in the shoulder seasons, as temps start dropping, it just isn't very fun to ride with all that weight on my back.
> 
> That said, I'm looking at getting an OMM rack to mount on the rear triangle. If I can even get just 3-5lbs off my back, that could make enough of a difference.
> 
> I'll also note that how much you can fit on your bike is HIGHLY dependent on how tall you are and how much travel and dropper you have. At 5'9", with a 29er, medium travel, and a substantial dropper, I've got just 2" between seat rails and tire. Meanwhile all those 6'5" giants out there riding 27.5 XC bikes still have room for a saddle bag.


I run a revelate vole seat pack with a 150mm dropper and was having issues with my rear tire hitting the bag on big hits. I put a wolf tooth valais on the dropper for the bag limiting it's travel to around 125mm and I was able to solve that problem. Might not work for you, I am 5-11 with 120mm travel, but might be worth looking into if you don't mind having limited travel on your dropper. I can cram a lot into that little seat pack. (3-5lbs)


----------

