# Trek Full Stache.



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Amazed that this hasn't broken the internet today.

https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/.../p/22688/?colorCode=greendark_greenvisibility

https://www.singletracks.com/blog/mtb-gear/trek-full-stache-new-full-suspension-29-mountain-bike/

Anyone else have one on the way?


----------



## mohrgan (Sep 12, 2013)

And it's even on sale!


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

I just went down and looked at one on lunch. It's a pretty impressive machine, and I finally got to see the xr4s 3.0s in person. Seems like it would be great in your area mikesee- maybe overkill for mine.


----------



## cobi (Apr 29, 2008)

Just when I think I can get past the funky look of the elevated chainstay they accentuate it to REALLY bring it out!


----------



## TheBaldBlur (Jan 13, 2014)

cobi said:


> Just when I think I can get past the funky look of the elevated chainstay they accentuate it to REALLY bring it out!


I laughed at one of the comments from the articles that said it looks like a male dog lifting it's leg to pee.


----------



## Just J (Feb 14, 2005)

mikesee said:


> Amazed that this hasn't broken the internet today.
> 
> https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/.../p/22688/?colorCode=greendark_greenvisibility
> 
> ...


I like this a lot, but I think I like your new bike better!


----------



## cobi (Apr 29, 2008)

mikesee said:


> Anyone else have one on the way?


Wait.......... you have one of these coming or did you mean any other manufacturers have one on the way? I just saw your new ride.........


----------



## Kirkerik (Apr 21, 2016)

Sweet! This is good!

Love to have the option, although I have to lean towards the farley ex for hub space compatability w my fatty!


----------



## Enel (Mar 23, 2004)

It is so nice to see this sort of machine from a big mainstream manufacturer. They nailed this bike, IMO and it makes me want to clear out the entire garage and buy one. Well done Trek.


----------



## phalkon30 (Jan 17, 2009)

Expensive for an aluminum bike, but I guess there isn't much to compare it to. Not a huge weight penalty over the hard tail stache which is nice.

I have the 2018 stache 9.7 and it's a beast of a bike that tackles Midwest trails amazingly, I bet this just eats up trail...


----------



## Ashe-villian (Feb 18, 2017)

I was considering the HT stache last year, but went in a different direction. I really like the Full stache. Might have to pull the trigger.


----------



## CBaron (May 7, 2004)

I'm a dedicated hardtail rider, and I don't plan to change that any time soon. But I'm definitely getting that "new bike attraction" vibe from this one, and its a strange feeling to me considering its an FS bike. I also find it good that if I ever do decide to go FS, that there is a bike with #'s I like and are combined with my love of the 29+ platform.

Later,
CJB


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

cobi said:


> Just when I think I can get past the funky look of the elevated chainstay they accentuate it to REALLY bring it out!


Black electrical tape. :thumbsup:


----------



## PHeller (Dec 28, 2012)

My question as always: 

Does it fit a 275x3.5" tire?


----------



## Coach417 (Jul 13, 2007)

I love the idea of trek implementing this design. My concern would be for lateral flex for aggressive riding. It annoys me that most reviewer/writers want to pigeon hole 29+ as a "back country explorer". I have been running 29+ for over a year in both SS and FS and love it for aggressive technical riding. Also have to agree, i want to demo mikesee's bike!


----------



## juan_speeder (May 11, 2008)

Coach417 said:


> I love the idea of trek implementing this design. My concern would be for lateral flex for aggressive riding. It annoys me that most reviewer/writers want to pigeon hole 29+ as a "back country explorer". I have been running 29+ for over a year in both SS and FS and love it for aggressive technical riding. Also have to agree, i want to demo mikesee's bike!


From bikemag.com's review - "The elevated chainstay makes that short rear center possible, but it leads to some frame flex. The back end feels vague when you punch it into a berm or pull up at an angle. And in the lower gears, the wheel can actually flex the frame enough that the tire will occasionally rub the chain. After I upgraded to Bontrager's Line 40 carbon rims, I found much of the flex disappeared. But under forceful riding, the flex is still there, and it's not subtle like non-Boost vs. Boost, or Bon Scott vs. Brian Johnson. It's significant, like Axl Rose vs. Brian Johnson."


----------



## pulsepro (Sep 13, 2007)

Amazing job Trek! It’s so great to see them making these types of bikes( 29+). 

The development and innovation in bikes the last 10 years has been incredible. Such a good time to be a rider and bike geek.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

juan_speeder said:


> From bikemag.com's review - "The elevated chainstay makes that short rear center possible, but it leads to some frame flex. The back end feels vague when you punch it into a berm or pull up at an angle. And in the lower gears, the wheel can actually flex the frame enough that the tire will occasionally rub the chain. After I upgraded to Bontrager's Line 40 carbon rims, I found much of the flex disappeared. But under forceful riding, the flex is still there, and it's not subtle like non-Boost vs. Boost, or Bon Scott vs. Brian Johnson. It's significant, like Axl Rose vs. Brian Johnson."


...so for the most part, it's not really the frame flexing, it's the (rear) wheel.

Make the frame in carbon and that'll pretty much disappear, just like the difference between AL and carbon Staches.


----------



## Dr Evil (Sep 20, 2015)

I saw one today at my LBS. Loved the OD or Coyote Green color (what ever they call it). Did find the lime green chain stay a bit loud though. Impressive looking bike.


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

Damn... Might buy my first Trek ever.


----------



## Libikerdad (Nov 18, 2017)

That's a cool looking ride. I literally just bought a mojo 3 to compliment my stache (maiden voyage was earlier today) but I'm glad to see trek is pushing the boundaries with this one. That said it is definitely too much bike for my local terrain, but definitely could see this an an excellent exploration bike in areas with vast stretches of wilderness


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Awesome. This is so much what I was waiting for. But $2k for alu frameset is rather expensive.

I bet this bike will sell fast!


----------



## jonm1211 (Aug 29, 2017)

Mebaru said:


> Awesome. This is so much what I was waiting for. But $2k for alu frameset is rather expensive.
> 
> I bet this bike will sell fast!


Isn't 2k pretty standard stuff for an alu full-suspension frameset?


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

jonm1211 said:


> Isn't 2k pretty standard stuff for an alu full-suspension frameset?


Probably you're right. Maybe I just saw too much discounted FS carbon frames around $2k


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

I think the Lenz is 2800.


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

NYrr496 said:


> I think the Lenz is 2800.


$2,400

I'm really enjoying my behemoth 29+. It's one of those bikes that just feels special and not like some generic mass produced bike.

The full stache is almost exactly what I was looking for earlier this year though. Had it been available, it would have been a very tough choice between the stache and behemoth. I hope I get a chance to ride one


----------



## bikeny (Feb 26, 2004)

I'm waiting for the carbon version!


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

bikeny said:


> I'm waiting for the carbon version!


Same here. Trek probably will roll out a range of 5/7/9.x models in the end of season or next season, if this one will sell well.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

coke said:


> I'm really enjoying my behemoth 29+. It's one of those bikes that just feels special and not like some generic massed produced bike.


Very true. But I like that Full Stache frame triangle is rather spacious for a FS bike and should be better suited for singletrack bikepacking with trail riding involved.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

i put a pic in over on the trek manufacturer forum of the rear. I doubt it if it's a true 3.5.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

It's got some substantial hydroform shaping. I have a feeling it was pretty pricey to build up the first run. It might get cheaper like the regular aluminum stache did though.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Mebaru said:


> Awesome. This is so much what I was waiting for. But $2k for alu frameset is rather expensive.
> 
> I bet this bike will sell fast!


They sold out (to dealers, from the mothership) in a few hours the first day they were available. So I'm told.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

mikesee said:


> They sold out (to dealers, from the mothership) in a few hours the first day they were available. So I'm told.


Astonishing. I am so anxious to read first reviews or impressions how it rides!


----------



## Kirkerik (Apr 21, 2016)

PHeller said:


> My question as always:
> 
> Does it fit a 275x3.5" tire?





Coach417 said:


> I love the idea of trek implementing this design. My concern would be for lateral flex for aggressive riding.





juan_speeder said:


> From bikemag.com's review - "The elevated chainstay makes that short rear center possible, but it leads to some frame flex. The back end feels vague when you punch it into a berm or pull up at an angle. And in the lower gears, the wheel can actually flex the frame enough that the tire will occasionally rub the chain. After I upgraded to Bontrager's Line 40 carbon rims, I found much of the flex disappeared. But under forceful riding, the flex is still there, and it's not subtle like non-Boost vs. Boost, or Bon Scott vs. Brian Johnson. It's significant, like Axl Rose vs. Brian Johnson."


How about the Farley EX? Sure it would be stiffer w the wider hubs and fits 4.0 and 29+!

Can anyone who has ridden both platforms in 29+ compare? Either way I'm sure the Full Stache is excellent in it's own w a more "modern" like geometry.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

My dealer had 2, they sold the first one sight unseen by phone the day before they officially went on sale and the buyer lived 130 miles from the shop.

Sounds like an early hit at least. It's not a bread and butter bike though so they probably won't go crazy ramping up manufacturing.


----------



## rth009 (May 20, 2010)

deleted


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

vikb said:


> Black electrical tape. :thumbsup:


I was thinking spray paint.


----------



## PHeller (Dec 28, 2012)

Kirkerik said:


> How about the Farley EX? Sure it would be stiffer w the wider hubs and fits 4.0 and 29+!


I dont want more hub sizes in my garage. It's bad enough having 135/142/148 bikes around. I like standardization in my garage cuz its cheap.

I also wouldn't get the full benefit of a 29x3 or 275x4" setup because I would only occasionally (bikepacking or dry/sandy months) run those combos. Most of the time I'd be on 29x2.4-2.6 setups.


----------



## bikeny (Feb 26, 2004)

PHeller said:


> I dont want more hub sizes in my garage. It's bad enough having 135/142/148 bikes around. I like standardization in my garage cuz its cheap.
> 
> I also wouldn't get the full benefit of a 29x3 or 275x4" setup because I would only occasionally (bikepacking or dry/sandy months) run those combos. Most of the time I'd be on 29x2.4-2.6 setups.


The problem is a 27.5x3.5 tire and Boost 148 just won't work together, at least not without major drivetrain modifications. You would have to offset the chainline out at the crank and drop a couple of cogs off the cassette and space it out as far as possible, otherwise the chain will rub the tire.


----------



## PHeller (Dec 28, 2012)

We can agree to disagree. Some of us are ok with increased drivetrain wear and imperfect chainline. 

Years ago they would have told us something like a 29x3" 130mm travel full-suspension with "normal" hubs and BB would be impossible, especially from a major manufacturer.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

PHeller said:


> I dont want more hub sizes in my garage. It's bad enough having 135/142/148 bikes around. I like standardization in my garage cuz its cheap.
> 
> I also wouldn't get the full benefit of a 29x3 or 275x4" setup because I would only occasionally (bikepacking or dry/sandy months) run those combos. Most of the time I'd be on 29x2.4-2.6 setups.


There's a lot more to 29+ than its ability to float on gravel and sand.


----------



## dRjOn (Feb 18, 2004)

does travis ever not look good on a bike?


----------



## Kirkerik (Apr 21, 2016)

PHeller said:


> I dont want more hub sizes in my garage. It's bad enough having 135/142/148 bikes around. I like standardization in my garage cuz its cheap.
> 
> I also wouldn't get the full benefit of a 29x3 or 275x4" setup because I would only occasionally (bikepacking or dry/sandy months) run those combos. Most of the time I'd be on 29x2.4-2.6 setups.


I hear ya! Exactly why i'd like another bike w 197/150 hub spacing as that is what my favorite bike is now. (Share Wheelsets) I do have a couple old 135/100 bikes that i got my money out of. Fortunately I have been waiting to let the hub spacing settle out.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

dRjOn said:


> does travis ever not look good on a bike?


It's all in the facial hair. Wonder where they got the name for this model from...


----------



## dRjOn (Feb 18, 2004)

mikesee said:


> It's all in the facial hair. Wonder where they got the name for this model from...


~


----------



## forgiven_nick (Nov 7, 2006)

Trek's first video of it with Gary as an announcer seemed very strange. Anyone else wonder why they didn't take a different approach to unveiling it? Not sure how well that video will sell the bike for them, but what do I know, I did not go to school for marketing...


----------



## bikeny (Feb 26, 2004)

PHeller said:


> We can agree to disagree. Some of us are ok with increased drivetrain wear and imperfect chainline.
> 
> Years ago they would have told us something like a 29x3" 130mm travel full-suspension with "normal" hubs and BB would be impossible, especially from a major manufacturer.


You might be OK with those compromises, but a major manufacturer will not be.

Don't get me wrong, I love that tire size, and my last custom build was spec'ed to fit them. But even with a 157mm rear and an 83mm BB, the chain still rubs a Hodag on a 65mm rim. When running that setup in the winter, I switch to a flat ring instead of the normal 6mm dished and it solves the issue.

Anyway, back on topic: this is a really cool bike. And that's coming from somebody who has not ridden any form of suspension in like a decade!


----------



## Osco (Apr 4, 2013)

A while back I moved from full suspension back to a hard tail because of boost and plus tires. Plus hard tails are all hard tail without the harsh ride, HT efficiency Is everything to me. I've got the 29er roll over with my 27.5 plus and am happy.

Yep Trek nailed It again but I don't think I'd pull the trigger because I'm doing just fine using my legs for rear suspension. 

I just don't want a bike that costs twice as much and Is six pounds heavier than my current bike.
There Is no way It Is twice the ride...


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

I basically agree with you, part of the reason I loved my stache from the get go is it got me back on a hard tail. But, I can sure think of a lot of areas where this would be the ticket and my hardtail gets overwhelmed. I don't ride those much because they aren't "fun", but maybe they would be fun on one of these?

I'm trying to resist the bug. I'm weakening.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Love the new Stache, and you can bet they are already riding carbon prototypes on their grounds and we'll see them soon enough to.


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

I didn't want Trek to release a FS Stache as I didn't want this dilemma!

It is tempting to just stick an order in for a frameset but then one of the reasons I love riding my Stache and stopped riding the Fuel is I like the feel of the hard tail.


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

forgiven_nick said:


> Trek's first video of it with Gary as an announcer seemed very strange. Anyone else wonder why they didn't take a different approach to unveiling it? Not sure how well that video will sell the bike for them, but what do I know, I did not go to school for marketing...


I like it.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Yeah, I saw a link on the plus forum, nice on Trek to bring this wheel size into the mainstream. Travel is less than my needs, but it looks like a sweet bike,

I'm left rubbing my head as to why folks insist the chainstays on this bike "must be flexy". Is it some preconceived notion based on the design?

Nice looking bike for big adventures. Price is quite fair.

... and I really liked that Trek ad, cuz I am most certainly a kook 



mikesee said:


> Amazed that this hasn't broken the internet today.
> 
> https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/.../p/22688/?colorCode=greendark_greenvisibility
> 
> ...


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

mikesee said:


> I was thinking spray paint.


Yup, same fugly look as the Devinci, what we're hey thinking?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Farley EX has less travel, is wider and heavier, so it depends on your needs and willingness to compromise. I would not count on the hub width making the bike stiffer. Both bikes are excellent options.



Kirkerik said:


> How about the Farley EX? Sure it would be stiffer w the wider hubs and fits 4.0 and 29+!
> 
> Can anyone who has ridden both platforms in 29+ compare? Either way I'm sure the Full Stache is excellent in it's own w a more "modern" like geometry.


----------



## LargeMan (May 20, 2017)

forgiven_nick said:


> Trek's first video of it with Gary as an announcer seemed very strange. Anyone else wonder why they didn't take a different approach to unveiling it? Not sure how well that video will sell the bike for them, but what do I know, I did not go to school for marketing...


Would be a cool video, BUT Salsa already had a bike like this, sooooo , not really anything special at this point but more options.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

LargeMan said:


> ...BUT Salsa already had a bike like this, sooooo , not really anything special at this point but more options.


And Lenz had a 29+ fully 1-2 years before Salsa. More options are good...especially when the number of models in a niche are so small.


----------



## Coach417 (Jul 13, 2007)

Nurse Ben said:


> I'm left rubbing my head as to why folks insist the chainstays on this bike "must be flexy". Is it some preconceived notion based on the design?


I can only base my reason for concern on the only two elevated chainstay design bikes I have ridden recently (can't include the old Nishiki Alien!). I had a brief stint with Stache SS and a Woodsmoke (geared). Both bikes under higher G corners felt flexy. The SS Stache was bad enough to get rid of. I was borrowing the Woodsmoke to see if it did the same thing and although it was less noticeable, I figured going SS it would be similar. I definitely ride less smoothly on my FS and would be concerned that lateral flex would be an issue. As the reports come in, I look to be pleasantly surprised by reports of a stiff frame. If I can demo one (doubtful), I will report back. The bike certainly has what I am looking for. I would gladly purchase Al. too. Just clarifying my concern.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

vikb said:


> And Lenz had a 29+ fully 1-2 years before Salsa. More options are good...especially when the number of models in a niche are so small.


More like 4 -- but who's counting? 

To say that the Salsa 29+ monstrosity has anything in common with this Trek is to compare a Toyota Tacoma to a Peterbuilt 18-wheeler. Sure, they both have wheels...


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

mikesee said:


> More like 4 -- but who's counting?


Devin gets credit for being at the forefront of a bunch of cool trends. :thumbsup:


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

vikb said:


> Devin gets credit for being at the forefront of a bunch of cool trends. :thumbsup:


Sure. And, in this case, thanks to Surly bringing the 29+ idea into the light.


----------



## foresterLV (Dec 25, 2016)

Coach417 said:


> I can only base my reason for concern on the only two elevated chainstay design bikes I have ridden recently (can't include the old Nishiki Alien!). I had a brief stint with Stache SS and a Woodsmoke (geared). Both bikes under higher G corners felt flexy. The SS Stache was bad enough to get rid of. I was borrowing the Woodsmoke to see if it did the same thing and although it was less noticeable, I figured going SS it would be similar. I definitely ride less smoothly on my FS and would be concerned that lateral flex would be an issue. As the reports come in, I look to be pleasantly surprised by reports of a stiff frame. If I can demo one (doubtful), I will report back. The bike certainly has what I am looking for. I would gladly purchase Al. too. Just clarifying my concern.


was it carbon or alu Stache SS?

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Kirkerik said:


> Sweet! This is good!
> 
> Love to have the option, although I have to lean towards the farley ex for hub space compatability w my fatty!


Comparing the Farley to a Stache is like comparing a capable athlete to a clumsy oaf. (Maybe not quite that drastic) Farley is a bike designed around geometry that encourages traversing backwoods trail. Stache is built around geometry that inspires you to manual, wheelie, jump, rail, etc...

Rebuttal #1: I can do all that on a Farley. True, you can drag race a stock f150 too.


----------



## LargeMan (May 20, 2017)

vikb said:


> And Lenz had a 29+ fully 1-2 years before Salsa. More options are good...especially when the number of models in a niche are so small.


Agreed. but the video stated TREK pretty much invented the the 29er+ FS.


----------



## Chemandy70 (Nov 16, 2013)

Salsa Deadwood is perfect in certain places of the world. how is it a monstrosity? not challenging just inquiring


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

Chemandy70 said:


> Salsa Deadwood is perfect in certain places of the world. how is it a monstrosity? not challenging just inquiring


Check the chainstay length, for starters.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Stache vs Deadwood

Just speculation, but I'm going to say it's a fun agile style of bike versus a tool to just traverse trail.

I've seen a few local Stache hardtail riders that love their Stache because it's supposedly a nimble, agile bike that begs to be manual'd, wheelied, carved, and jumped. But when I watch these guys ride, they don't do any of that. They just sit and pedal. They have a hardtail that is not harsh on their butt, rolls over anything, and it's got great traction. That's the real reason it's comfortable to them obviously. They're just regurgitating the marketing jargon when they're asked why they like it because they're obviously not riding that way.

Those same style of riders are going to like the Deadwood just fine and not see a need for a Full Stache because they're not going to know the difference in capabilities.

Now someone who jumps, rides off small cliffs (less than 5ish feet, I'd say) manuals through rollers, and pushes the bike in a fun agile way will obviously see the clear advantages of the 130mm travel, short chainstay, longer reach and stack Stache over the Deadwood which is more of a plus size XC bike.

So Full Stache is an agile, longer travel bike for the more daring line oriented rider. Deadwood is more for the sit and spin trail Rider who doesn't necessarily get rowdy.


That said... If you read Treks description, they make it sound like the dual suspension version of the 1120, not the Stache. Stache was marketed as the rowdy hardtail. 1120 is the bikepacker. Full Stache is the rowdy bikepacker? Wha??



Stache, the fun rowdy trail hardtail:

"You're all about fast and fun trail rides with your friends. Stache 7 is a playful 29+ trail hardtail with 3˝ mid-fat tires, a ridiculously capable build, and a robust fork with 120mm of travel. This mountain bike marries fun and confidence. It's a big-wheeled fun wagon ready to go anywhere and take on any trail. The 3˝ mid-fat tires and full carbon frame make it our most fun and capable hardtail mountain bike ever... a fun trail hardtail that holds its own with both the distance-crushing XC crowd and your rowdy trail-riding buddies."



1120, the ultra capable back country explorer:

"1120 is a bikepacker's dream. A rugged all-terrain frame, 29+ tires, an included rack system, and mountain-ready spec like a 1x drivetrain add up to a touring bike with unlimited off-road capability. This bike is built to explore the most extreme backcountry destinations in the farthest reaches of the world, and it's great for fast overnight bikepacking trips and sub-24s, too."



Full Stache, the bikepacker gnarwagon??":

"If you love seeking out the untamed trails in the wild and discovering new lines while ripping bikepacking adventures, Full Stache 8 is your dream ride."


----------



## upstateSC-rider (Dec 25, 2003)

I actually test rode a Deadwood today, my first + bike, on a real trail. I really can't compare it to a stache because I've only ridden one in a parking lot. I love the roll-over capabilities of the bike (came with 2.6 Rekons), but like chelboed said, you really can't get too rowdy on it, you can go fast but not rowdy
The thing has grip for days, I could brake way later going into a fast and sketchy corners than my Jet 9 with 2.35's.

If I could fit 2.6's on my old Jet 9 RDO I think I'd be set for life, does it mean I have to start looking for a Trail bike capable of running 2.6's rather than buying a Plus bike capable of running bigger tires than I will probably use. 
I think so.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

Salsa, not as good at Trek, but at the same price. (Pertaining to the 29+ market)


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

I honestly think the Full Stache is more "Stache" than "1120", but they know that if they make it look more Stachely on paper and throw the Aggressive & Bikepacker verbage into the description as well, they'll likely score unsuspecting sales on both sides from those who don't know what they want.

Tricky. IMO, Bikepacking on a Full Stache with limited bottle mounts and pannier mounts seems very "untrendy" and would likely get you shunned by your gnarcore plaid, bearded bikepacker group.

It's against the laws these days to bikepack without an anything cage triple bottle mount.

It's a plus bike for riding gnarly.


----------



## mikeetheviking (Jan 27, 2015)

Full Stache Likes

Elevated chainstays
Slack but not too slack HTA
Pike
Color
Drivetrain
Price

Dislikes

I’m not much of a hater
But it would be cool to do a frame up with one of these with select components

Happy to see this machine exist on planet earth

sidenote:I have ridden the Deadwood Sus

I liked it


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

I have a 29+ fully on my short list. Probably my next bike. I didn't care too much for the Salsa but I was really liking the Lenz. I like the Trek as well. Here's my dilemma...
I'm one of those people who will keep a bike like this a good, long time. I have a Specialized Stumpjumper I originally bought in 2008. About 9 months in, I cracked the frame. They gave me a new frame. Then, I cracked a chainstay. I had to buy that and when I did get it, they told me there were only a few left. I grabbed a second one just in case. I still have that frame and both chainstays but I don't ride it any more. It did bother me though that I wouldn't be able to keep that bike in working order more than two years. 
I would think if I got a Lenz, I would always be able to have a new part made as long as they're in buisiness. 
If I got the Trek, how long would it be before I wouldn't be able to repair it? 
Now... If I were 50 pounds lighter, none of this would matter.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

vikb said:


> And Lenz had a 29+ fully 1-2 years before Salsa. More options are good...especially when the number of models in a niche are so small.


Had to dig it up: 5 years ago. I never bonded with the Knards but I knew pretty quickly that 29+ was the path forward for me.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

Nurse Ben said:


> Yeah, I saw a link on the plus forum, nice on Trek to bring this wheel size into the mainstream. Travel is less than my needs, but it looks like a sweet bike,
> 
> I'm left rubbing my head as to why folks insist the chainstays on this bike "must be flexy". Is it some preconceived notion based on the design?
> 
> ...


Wait, 130mm on a 29+ is less than your needs? Where the hell do you ride ?

(I think the bikemag article is where the flexy came from, but then they fixed it with a carbon wheel- so maybe the wheel was the flexy part...)


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

I got some time on one tonight. Switched back and forth with a friend that was demoing one. Fun, chunky, techy local trails (Moore/Mack). Super impressive bike. Travel felt deeper than expected out back. Didn't notice any rear end flex when riding it, nor when riding behind it.


----------



## TheBaldBlur (Jan 13, 2014)

mikesee said:


> I got some time on one tonight. Switched back and forth with a friend that was demoing one. Fun, chunky, techy local trails (Moore/Mack). Super impressive bike. Travel felt deeper than expected out back. Didn't notice any rear end flex when riding it, nor when riding behind it.


I won't ask how it compares to your new ride from Walt because I'm sure they're very different animals. But how would you compare the ride of the Full Stace to the Lenz Behemoth having ridden both?


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

TheBaldBlur said:


> I won't ask how it compares to your new ride from Walt because I'm sure they're very different animals. But how would you compare the ride of the Full Stace to the Lenz Behemoth having ridden both?


15 minutes on a bike does not give one the capability to compare it to anything else with any level of realism. It's enough to form a knee-jerk reaction, and I've shared that here already.


----------



## Coach417 (Jul 13, 2007)

Very glad to hear about the lateral stiffness. I look forward to reading more first hand ride reports.

foresterLV- It was carbon


----------



## jukeyboy (Feb 18, 2013)

bikeny said:


> I'm waiting for the carbon version!


I'm with you on this one!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Go big or go home!

I rode lots of chunk, at speed, big hits, drops, air time. I can burn up 130mm of travel without much effort. I find 150mm to be the sweet spot, but would take another 10mm up front if I can get it.

I'm waiting on a Ripmo delivery, 29er FS, XR4 2.6, 160mm/145mm, not as short as Mike's new bike, doesn't have the capacity for a true plus tire, but it's got good geo, good suspension design (DW), and it'll be a solid all around bike for my "one bike quiver".

I still have a Hendrix FS Plus as my loaner and a Wozo running 29 x 3 XR4.

Maybe you need to move out West, where everything is bigger 



MrIcky said:


> Wait, 130mm on a 29+ is less than your needs? Where the hell do you ride ?
> 
> (I think the bikemag article is where the flexy came from, but then they fixed it with a carbon wheel- so maybe the wheel was the flexy part...)


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

Nurse Ben said:


> Go big or go home!
> 
> I rode lots of chunk, at speed, big hits, drops, air time. I can burn up 130mm of travel without much effort. I find 150mm to be the sweet spot, but would take another 10mm up front if I can get it.
> 
> ...


I live in Idaho- so, pretty out west. I can imagine needing all that suspension on a Ripmo with those tiny tires lol. I'm just funnin' of course. 130 with a full 29x3 just sounds huge.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Some pics from last night's ride. Greg was feeling a bit beat down from a bit of the crud as well as having ridden hard the night before. Still, on his first ride on this bike, he seemed pretty energized by it, hopping and popping and carving and manualing his way along. He was officially demo'ing the bike but my guess is that he went back to the shop and bought it this morning.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

I rode the full stache 8 about two hours ago. That thing is about 60 pounds with boat anchor tires haha. I only rode it in the alley and parking lot but i could wheelie at will. Now is that good or bad? Not sure, but i bet once you got this thing rolling down something like whole enchilada it would be a runaway freight train. I just see it as a niche bike not a trendsetter. Its probably good for going really slow and rock crawlimg or going INSANELY fast downhill. I wouldnt think it would have much use in the midwest or east coast too tight and fast.


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> I only rode it in the alley and parking lot.
> 
> I wouldnt think it would have much use in the midwest or east coast too tight and fast


In my opinion, that type of test ride will tell you almost nothing about how a bike will ride on trails. Almost like forming an opinion of a road bike after taking it on a quick ride through a rock garden :skep:


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

Sounds like the bike for me.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

coke said:


> In my opinion, that type of test ride will tell you almost nothing about how a bike will ride on trails. Almost like forming an opinion of a road bike after taking it on a quick ride through a rock garden :skep:


I agree, at least im not that guy who ride sthe bike around the parking lot then buys it! Then sells it a month later haha.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I lived in the southeast for many years, I feel your pain, it kinda sucks to be so far removed from the kind of riding this bike is designed for.

But there's hope! I moved back out to the west four years ago, now I get to ride all the cool stuff whenever I want.

Maybe you'll get to move someday, until then you'll just have to dream 

Cool bike!



LaneDetroitCity said:


> I rode the full stache 8 about two hours ago. That thing is about 60 pounds with boat anchor tires haha. I only rode it in the alley and parking lot but i could wheelie at will. Now is that good or bad? Not sure, but i bet once you got this thing rolling down something like whole enchilada it would be a runaway freight train. I just see it as a niche bike not a trendsetter. Its probably good for going really slow and rock crawlimg or going INSANELY fast downhill. I wouldnt think it would have much use in the midwest or east coast too tight and fast.


----------



## danglingmanhood (Sep 16, 2005)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> I rode the full stache 8 about two hours ago. That thing is about 60 pounds with boat anchor tires haha. I only rode it in the alley and parking lot but i could wheelie at will. Now is that good or bad? Not sure, but i bet once you got this thing rolling down something like whole enchilada it would be a runaway freight train. I just see it as a niche bike not a trendsetter. Its probably good for going really slow and rock crawlimg or going INSANELY fast downhill. I wouldnt think it would have much use in the midwest or east coast too tight and fast.


It is actually is only 32lbs for a 19", so not all that heavy for what kind of bike the Full Stache is.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

Nurse Ben said:


> I lived in the southeast for many years, I feel your pain, it kinda sucks to be so far removed from the kind of riding this bike is designed for.
> 
> But there's hope! I moved back out to the west four years ago, now I get to ride all the cool stuff whenever I want.
> 
> ...


I am in Arizona for winter training. I would love this bike for out here because i love to climb tech gnar. Its just not a xc race bike which is all i can afford right now. I was more saying that since i kmow the trails in the Midwest and east coast i would eliminate this bike from your thoughts if you live there. That includes Asheville and vicinity. Now out west, northwest, this thing is probably a MONSTER. I can just imagine climbing up Milagrosa in Tucson on this thing. Then bombing back down. I would be very careful if you are not an experienced rider because when this thing gets going its going to be a runaway freight train. I would not buy this under the reallm of buying skill like most people try to do. Stick to a fuel ex or remedy for that. This is like a 1000cc sportbike, just because you can buy it doesnt mean you should. However if you have skill and ride this bike you can probably do outrageous joy inducing things. Vs just hanging on for dear life. Ya it probably rolls over EVERYTHING, literally, that can be good and bad i would think. I rode the Salsa Deadwood during outside onlines bike test in Tucson and that thing is also a beast but more for keeping the wheels on the ground at all times. This stache is for sky is the limit riding, if you have the balls its ready for any gap you can find, any rock garden, tech climb, drops, tricks, whatever.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

danglingmanhood said:


> It is actually is only 32lbs for a 19", so not all that heavy for what kind of bike the Full Stache is.


32lbs seema about right, it felt like 60 compared to my 19lb hardtail. It was a 19.5 i rode. If they offered a 5 grand 28lb carbon that would be amazing. You cant call a 32lb bike a bikepacking rig though, loaded up it will be over 40lbs. Thats a lot to push uphill.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Y'all crack meet up... act like they forgot to spec brakes on it or something...runaway freight train...1000cc sport bike...get real.

Only for experienced riders? Heck, plus bikes tame the trail so inexperienced riders can ride it.


----------



## PoshJosh (Mar 30, 2007)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> I am in Arizona for winter training. I would love this bike for out here because i love to climb tech gnar. Its just not a xc race bike which is all i can afford right now. I was more saying that since i kmow the trails in the Midwest and east coast i would eliminate this bike from your thoughts if you live there. That includes Asheville and vicinity. Now out west, northwest, this thing is probably a MONSTER. I can just imagine climbing up Milagrosa in Tucson on this thing. Then bombing back down. I would be very careful if you are not an experienced rider because when this thing gets going its going to be a runaway freight train. I would not buy this under the reallm of buying skill like most people try to do. Stick to a fuel ex or remedy for that. This is like a 1000cc sportbike, just because you can buy it doesnt mean you should. However if you have skill and ride this bike you can probably do outrageous joy inducing things. Vs just hanging on for dear life. Ya it probably rolls over EVERYTHING, literally, that can be good and bad i would think. I rode the Salsa Deadwood during outside onlines bike test in Tucson and that thing is also a beast but more for keeping the wheels on the ground at all times. This stache is for sky is the limit riding, if you have the balls its ready for any gap you can find, any rock garden, tech climb, drops, tricks, whatever.


Drugs are bad.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> You cant call a 32lb bike a bikepacking rig though, loaded up it will be over 40lbs. Thats a lot to push uphill.


That's not true. A lot of bikepacking specific bikes have steel frames and fat wheels. Add a suspension fork and you easily go over 30lbs without gear. Saving a few pounds with carbon frame won't make your ride a lot more easier, especially on multi-day trips where you have to carry a big supply of water and food.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

richde said:


> ...so for the most part, it's not really the frame flexing, it's the (rear) wheel.
> 
> Make the frame in carbon and that'll pretty much disappear


If it's the rear wheel, how does changing frame material solve it?!


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> I am in Arizona for winter training. I would love this bike for out here because i love to climb tech gnar. Its just not a xc race bike which is all i can afford right now. I was more saying that since i kmow the trails in the Midwest and east coast i would eliminate this bike from your thoughts if you live there. That includes Asheville and vicinity. Now out west, northwest, this thing is probably a MONSTER. I can just imagine climbing up Milagrosa in Tucson on this thing. Then bombing back down. I would be very careful if you are not an experienced rider because when this thing gets going its going to be a runaway freight train. I would not buy this under the reallm of buying skill like most people try to do. Stick to a fuel ex or remedy for that. This is like a 1000cc sportbike, just because you can buy it doesnt mean you should. However if you have skill and ride this bike you can probably do outrageous joy inducing things. Vs just hanging on for dear life. Ya it probably rolls over EVERYTHING, literally, that can be good and bad i would think. I rode the Salsa Deadwood during outside onlines bike test in Tucson and that thing is also a beast but more for keeping the wheels on the ground at all times. This stache is for sky is the limit riding, if you have the balls its ready for any gap you can find, any rock garden, tech climb, drops, tricks, whatever.


Hyperbole, and a half.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

mikesee said:


> If it's the rear wheel, how does changing frame material solve it?!


Are you suggesting carbonium is not magically able to solve all of your life's problems Mike?


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

A 32lb bike with 130mm of travel and 29 x3.0 tires is an accident waiting to happen for inexperienced riders who will get a false sense ofconfidence based on the bikes ability to conquer anything. They will then try stuff above their level and get into a jam. I see it all the time on bikes even like a Hightower and things like that. Nobody is buying this bike to ride smooth flat trails. Thats my opinion. Make fun of me, make stupid commens, do whatever you want from your positions of high bike authority. Ill leave you all to be experts.


----------



## RAKC Ind (Jan 27, 2017)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> A 32lb bike with 130mm of travel and 29 x3.0 tires is an accident waiting to happen for inexperienced riders who will get a false sense ofconfidence based on the bikes ability to conquer anything. They will then try stuff above their level and get into a jam. I see it all the time on bikes even like a Hightower and things like that. Nobody is buying this bike to ride smooth flat trails. Thats my opinion. Make fun of me, make stupid commens, do whatever you want from your positions of high bike authority. Ill leave you all to be experts.


This happens going from a walmart bike to a decent mountain bike. This concern is kind of lost. Mountain biking is one of the sports where designing them around peoples arrogance and ignorance isnt possible.

But literally saw this same arguement come up with fat bike suspension and so on. Most new riders arent going to drop the coin for one of these. And if some do and get in over their head....

WHY IS IT THE BIKE'S FAULT???

Never understood blaming inanimate objects for the poor choices of the people that own them.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

That's an impressive video, mainly because he rode it like a 29+ (i.e. just charged it). Thanks for sharing that.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I only have one question for you: How does a bike like the Stache rate being compared to a superbike or as a bike for experienced riders only? My Fatillac weighs more than the Full Stache, has more travel, and shorter chainstays, and my newbie brother rode it and slayed the trail!

I struggle to find an example of a bike that only benefits expert riders. I have put countless people on pro level bikes from fat to DH and as long as the bike is functional and the rider knows how to do the basics (brake shift, balance), they can ride the bike. Go to a bike park and watch the newbies rent DH bikes and ride down the hill, it totally works.

I think you are acting a bit like "chicken little".

As far as I'm concerned, the Full Stache is no different than a regular Stache, but with rear squish. It is certainly much tamer than the endure/DH bikes sold by Trek and others.

I could see the Stache being a great all around bike for many terrains and riders, just the right mix of design and function to suit the needs of moderate to expert terrain. It's not really an XC bike, but then neither is any bike with plus tires and more than 100mm of suspension.

I'd put my wife or daughter; both very novice riders, on a Full Stache without a second thought. I think this bike would make a great Moab rental.



LaneDetroitCity said:


> A 32lb bike with 130mm of travel and 29 x3.0 tires is an accident waiting to happen for inexperienced riders who will get a false sense ofconfidence based on the bikes ability to conquer anything. They will then try stuff above their level and get into a jam. I see it all the time on bikes even like a Hightower and things like that. Nobody is buying this bike to ride smooth flat trails. Thats my opinion. Make fun of me, make stupid commens, do whatever you want from your positions of high bike authority. Ill leave you all to be experts.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

A well designed 29er does not have to ride tall, long, and and unwieldy.

This is kinda the point of the Stache and this is likely why Mikesee named his wheel building service the way he did (Lacemine29). Obviously he likes big wheels, but he's been a big wheel since before it was cool. Insight, trial and error, doing it.

Big wheels work, it's why 27.5 has more or less obliterated the 26" market, and it is why there are some many folks rolling wagon wheels.

All one needs a few moments on a well designed 29er to see the light.

I would much rather ride my Wozo as a 29+ than my Hendrix as a 27+, in nearly all situations because it is faster, better rolling, and more stable. I only ride FS because they are more comfortable on long rides, they can take bigger hits, and they accommodate slow rolling steep tech better.

This bike is gonna be a big hit.



MrIcky said:


> That's an impressive video, mainly because he rode it like a 29+ (i.e. just charged it). Thanks for sharing that.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

Nurse Ben said:


> I only have one question for you: How does a bike like the Stache rate being compared to a superbike or as a bike for experienced riders only? My Fatillac weighs more than the Full Stache, has more travel, and shorter chainstays, and my newbie brother rode it and slayed the trail!
> 
> I struggle to find an example of a bike that only benefits expert riders. I have put countless people on pro level bikes from fat to DH and as long as the bike is functional and the rider knows how to do the basics (brake shift, balance), they can ride the bike. Go to a bike park and watch the newbies rent DH bikes and ride down the hill, it totally works.
> 
> ...


Ive ridden in Asheville, bentonville, stillwater, palo duro canyon, las cruces new mexico, tucson, phoenix, the azt, and prescott since November lol. Ya maybe someday ill leave my moms basement. I hold the kom climbing up Milagrosa on rdo hardtail with 2.2 tires. I dont need to buy skill. However ive seen many many many many many people buy way too much bike thinking the bike will give them skill. Then they hurt themselves. All i was saying is this bike is a bike that fits that "oh, if i have the full stache i can ride anything" category. At no point did i say this wasnt a sweet bike and awesome concept and ive already stated if i had the money i would have bought the one i test rode. Im just trying to have a balanced duscussion. Suddenly im a drug addict. Tha s asinine. Sorry for giving my opinion from multiple perspectives. Im unsubscribing from this thread you can all go back to being the best. So dont keep quoting me because i dont need my phone getting notifications.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

This particular bike isn't going to be purchased by an inexperienced person without some wierd salesmanship going on. This bike is mainly going to be for people who know precisely what they wanted and have been watching for it. There may be a small percentage who buy on a lark, but it's too expensive and wierd (and rare for now). Try explaining why this is worth $500 more than a Fuel EX8 or $300 more than a 27.5+ to someone who's not sure if they even like the sport yet. 

Mountain biking is a dangerous sport. If you don't wreck once and a while, you aren't progressing. If it makes you feel better, it's ok to blame the bike- it doesn't mind.


----------



## PoshJosh (Mar 30, 2007)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> Ive ridden in Asheville, bentonville, stillwater, palo duro canyon, las cruces new mexico, tucson, phoenix, the azt, and prescott since November lol. Ya maybe someday ill leave my moms basement. I hold the kom climbing up Milagrosa on rdo hardtail with 2.2 tires. I dont need to buy skill. However ive seen many many many many many people buy way too much bike thinking the bike will give them skill. Then they hurt themselves. All i was saying is this bike is a bike that fits that "oh, if i have the full stache i can ride anything" category. At no point did i say this wasnt a sweet bike and awesome concept and ive already stated if i had the money i would have bought the one i test rode. Im just trying to have a balanced duscussion. Suddenly im a drug addict. Tha s asinine. Sorry for giving my opinion from multiple perspectives. Im unsubscribing from this thread you can all go back to being the best. So dont keep quoting me because i dont need my phone getting notifications.


Ok jokes up, you work for Specialized...


----------



## laurenlex (Sep 13, 2006)

This bike looks good for: WA, OR, CA, ID, UT, NV, MT, WY, CO, AZ, NM

Except for : Green, Blue, Flow, and Boring trails.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Well, I suppose you're right, maybe I need to cut back on the Kombucha.

But seriously dude, you got multiple people responding to your statements and they all said the same thing.

That should make you scratch your head and go hmmmm.

Just saying.



LaneDetroitCity said:


> Ive ridden in Asheville, bentonville, stillwater, palo duro canyon, las cruces new mexico, tucson, phoenix, the azt, and prescott since November lol. Ya maybe someday ill leave my moms basement. I hold the kom climbing up Milagrosa on rdo hardtail with 2.2 tires. I dont need to buy skill. However ive seen many many many many many people buy way too much bike thinking the bike will give them skill. Then they hurt themselves. All i was saying is this bike is a bike that fits that "oh, if i have the full stache i can ride anything" category. At no point did i say this wasnt a sweet bike and awesome concept and ive already stated if i had the money i would have bought the one i test rode. Im just trying to have a balanced duscussion. Suddenly im a drug addict. Tha s asinine. Sorry for giving my opinion from multiple perspectives. Im unsubscribing from this thread you can all go back to being the best. So dont keep quoting me because i dont need my phone getting notifications.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

See, that's where you are very wrong.

People buy a bike because they get on it and it rides the way they want to ride.

I have not ridden this bike, but I've ridden a lot of bikes over the years.

I have bought bikes without a demo, I have also not bought bikes because of a demo.

Like a nice fitting pair of shoes, if it feels right it will sell.

Ask yourself how this bike is selling and you might learn a thing or two. Based on reports, I believe they are sold out.



MrIcky said:


> This particular bike isn't going to be purchased by an inexperienced person without some wierd salesmanship going on. This bike is mainly going to be for people who know precisely what they wanted and have been watching for it. There may be a small percentage who buy on a lark, but it's too expensive and wierd (and rare for now). Try explaining why this is worth $500 more than a Fuel EX8 or $300 more than a 27.5+ to someone who's not sure if they even like the sport yet.
> 
> Mountain biking is a dangerous sport. If you don't wreck once and a while, you aren't progressing. If it makes you feel better, it's ok to blame the bike- it doesn't mind.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

Nurse Ben said:


> See, that's where you are very wrong.
> 
> People buy a bike because they get on it and it rides the way they want to ride.
> 
> ...


Ya, I'm one of the people on the last page reporting on the dealer sales. As I said they sold the first 1 sight unseen to a guy who lived 150 miles away over the phone. I'm not talking about "people"- I'm talking about inexperienced bike riders. New mountain bike riders always try to save a buck.

This bike won't appeal in a parking lot test. It will feel draggy compared to an ex8. Beginners rarely pop the $50 to test on real terrain

So again, unless there is some unusual salesmanship, I don't see this going to inexperienced riders in most cases.

So I've bought a new mtb every 3-4 years since 1987 and I live out west, any more challenges you feel l need to pass before I have an opinion?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk


----------



## fotooutdoors (Jul 8, 2010)

mikesee said:


> If it's the rear wheel, how does changing frame material solve it?!


I assumed that was a tongue in check statement; ie carbon frames are so amazing, they even fix wheels.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

chelboed said:


> Y'all crack meet up... act like they forgot to spec brakes on it or something...runaway freight train...1000cc sport bike...get real.
> 
> Only for experienced riders? Heck, plus bikes tame the trail so inexperienced riders can ride it.





LaneDetroitCity said:


> A 32lb bike with 130mm of travel and 29 x3.0 tires is an accident waiting to happen for inexperienced riders who will get a false sense ofconfidence based on the bikes ability to conquer anything. They will then try stuff above their level and get into a jam. I see it all the time on bikes even like a Hightower and things like that. Nobody is buying this bike to ride smooth flat trails. Thats my opinion. Make fun of me, make stupid commens, do whatever you want from your positions of high bike authority. Ill leave you all to be experts.


No need to be thin skinned. Also no need to antagonize people with personal attacks like people are doing to you. I think that making a blanket statement about noobs destroying themselves on a $3600 bike is possible, but nowhere close to the norm and as exaggerated as a statement like putting noobs on pro level bikes countless times. Nothing is countless, hehehe. It's only countless because you forgot to count them.

Like someone saying..."Oh my staff is just amazing!" No they're not. You have a few high performers and the rest are adequate.

It's only a dangerous bike because you assume everyone who mounts up is unaware of their capabilities.

I think people just have verbal diarrhea these days. This post confirms that fact. 😂


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

No test to pass, the proof is in the pudding.

This bike will be as successful as the Stache, possibly more so because it will appeal to a broader group of riders.

If it's successful, you can send me a picture of you eating a shoe, and if it's not successful I'll send you a picture of me eating a book 



MrIcky said:


> Ya, I'm one of the people on the last page reporting on the dealer sales. As I said they sold the first 1 sight unseen to a guy who lived 150 miles away over the phone. I'm not talking about "people"- I'm talking about inexperienced bike riders. New mountain bike riders always try to save a buck.
> 
> This bike won't appeal in a parking lot test. It will feel draggy compared to an ex8. Beginners rarely pop the $50 to test on real terrain
> 
> ...


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

Nurse Ben said:


> No test to pass, the proof is in the pudding.
> 
> This bike will be as successful as the Stache, possibly more so because it will appeal to a broader group of riders.
> 
> If it's successful, you can send me a picture of you eating a shoe, and if it's not successful I'll send you a picture of me eating a book


Dude, you need to read closely. When did I EVER say it wouldn't be successful? I said this bike wouldn't appeal to new riders and I gave reasons. I DIDN'T say it would be BAD for new riders, or experienced riders or anyone else. You keep quoting me without reading what I wrote.

I wouldn't be surprised at all if it sells well. But again, I think it's going to people with some experience who know what they want in a bike (for the most part) or at minimum with experienced friends guiding them

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I don't really expect a picture of you eating a shoe 



MrIcky said:


> Dude, you need to read closely. When did I EVER say it wouldn't be successful? I said this bike wouldn't appeal to new riders and I gave reasons. I DIDN'T say it would be BAD for new riders, or experienced riders or anyone else. You keep quoting me without reading what I wrote.
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised at all if it sells well. But again, I think it's going to people with some experience who know what they want in a bike (for the most part) or at minimum with experienced friends guiding them
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

Cool, I really don't want to mail you an _Easy Reader_ either :thumbsup:


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Easy and big letters, eyes are getting old.


----------



## petejupp (Feb 14, 2008)

Bike Magazine have tested it and created a nice video - 
Bike Test: Trek’s Full Stache 8 Shreds into Uncharted Territory, on YouTube.
At about 2.30 minutes you can see many little white "impacts" on the seatstays and also on the seat tube. One can only hope that this is some kind of dirt or something else and not that the Full Stache has also the same bad paint quality like the Slash 9.9 RSL...


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

petejupp said:


> Bike Magazine have tested it and created a nice video -
> Bike Test: Trek's Full Stache 8 Shreds into Uncharted Territory, on YouTube.
> At about 2.30 minutes you can see many little white "impacts" on the seatstays and also on the seat tube. One can only hope that this is some kind of dirt or something else and not that the Full Stache has also the same bad paint quality like the Slash 9.9 RSL...


I watched that video and thought it looked like a bike that had been ridden the way it was intended, and those are beauty marks as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

litespeedaddict said:


> I watched that video and thought it looked like a bike that had been ridden the way it was intended, and those are beauty marks as far as I'm concerned.


THIS!

It's a mountain bike. It's going to get scratched. Put an 80's skateboarding sticker over it and ride-on!!


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

Everyone - I Pruned some posts that included personal attacks.

Make your points without accusing others of being on drugs or drunk, calling names, etc.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Klurejr said:


> Everyone - I Pruned some posts that included personal attacks.
> 
> Make your points without accusing others of being on drugs or drunk, calling names, etc.


Pruned posts... What, are you on drugs?!?

Thanks man. This is a good thread with lots of good info without that crap.


----------



## noosa2 (May 20, 2004)

Was down in Tucson today and got to check out a large full stache. Very nice. I've never even thought about getting a Trek before but the full stache has me thinking...do I buy a complete or just the frame (and headset and stem)?


----------



## mikeetheviking (Jan 27, 2015)

If a new bike warranty is appealing to you a complete new bike would be ideal. Buying a complete bike new will most likely save you quite a bit of time and money overall. If you did a frame up you could go all out and turn this thing into a dream machine.

When this bike is released as a carbon 9 or 9.8 or whatever that would really warrant a dream build.

The current spec is hard to beat for the average rider.

However it’s very very easy to imagine what you could turn this thing into with a dreamy wheelset

I’m stoked to see Trek doing awesome stuff like this

I feel overall this is superb bang for the buck

If you priced out all the components for this bike individually you couldn’t come close to getting all of it for this price.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

mikeetheviking said:


> If a new bike warranty is appealing to you a complete new bike would be ideal. Buying a complete bike new will most likely save you quite a bit of time and money overall. If you did a frame up you could go all out and turn this thing into a dream machine.
> 
> When this bike is released as a carbon 9 or 9.8 or whatever that would really warrant a dream build.
> 
> ...


I think the suspension is good and the drivetrain is pretty adequate. I'm pretty sure I'd change the brakes, wheelset, tires, saddle, bars, and stem.

A cockpit is a very personal fit...especially as long as I've been in the cockpit. Tires are too heavy and a little overkill for my region. Brakes? I like XT...I'm smitten. Wheelset is heavy and I can't stand straight g spokes and generic hubs. Seatpost is a wash. I'm sure it functions adequately, but I'd love to boutique it out with a KS carbon to save weight, or a Bike Yoke just for reliability's sake...but as I said, the house brand crap is likely adequate.

You could build this bike under 28#


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

chelboed said:


> You could build this bike under 28#


I won't say never, but that's a really tall order -- assuming we're talking legitimate plus wheels and tires. And if you were able to get close I'd bet you'd be looking at ~$8k. Probably more.

I built one from the frame up. Not so much with a weight weenie mentality, but with a "what works well" view, with weight secondary to price. Pike, carbon bars, DT hubs, butted spokes, Duroc rims (which are actually really light), XT group. It ended up at 32#. I bet I could get it to ~30# with some compromises, and a a few thousand more $$$$.

When you start with an 8# frame/shock combo, you can only go so far.


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

30 pound 29+ fully would be perfect for me. My Krampus weighs about 31.5 pounds and it doesn't feel heavy to me. I hover around 250 give or take 15 pounds so a 32 pound bike is about right for me.


----------



## noosa2 (May 20, 2004)

mikesee said:


> I built one from the frame up. Not so much with a weight weenie mentality, but with a "what works well" view, with weight secondary to price. Pike, carbon bars, DT hubs, butted spokes, Duroc rims (which are actually really light), XT group.


Pics please. Also, did you keep the knock block stem?


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

mikesee said:


> I won't say never, but that's a really tall order -- assuming we're talking legitimate plus wheels and tires. And if you were able to get close I'd bet you'd be looking at ~$8k. Probably more.
> 
> I built one from the frame up. Not so much with a weight weenie mentality, but with a "what works well" view, with weight secondary to price. Pike, carbon bars, DT hubs, butted spokes, Duroc rims (which are actually really light), XT group. It ended up at 32#. I bet I could get it to ~30# with some compromises, and a a few thousand more $$$$.
> 
> When you start with an 8# frame/shock combo, you can only go so far.


According to Bikemag, the Full Stache is 33.4#.

Save 0.8# going tubeless.

Line Pro wheelset: 1830g (2515g for the stock OEM Bontrager- Hub, OEM sleeved Duroc rimmed wheelset) Saved 755g or 1.7#

XR4 tires are 1100g. XR2 is 870. All that times-2x is 460g saved, or 1.01#.

So we've got a stock basic build with an upgraded wheelset, tubeless, and XR2 tires and we're already down to 29.19#.

I don't think it will take an act of God to hit 28#. If you start from a frame-up build, you could in theory do a Fox float and save weight, but I like the PIKE myself. I know Bontrager house brand crap is kinda heavy. The saddle is a boat anchor. I don't think the bars / stem are anything to scream about.

Heck, you can save a 1/2# moving to XT brakes and they can be found pretty cheap. (0.61# saved to be exact...now down to 28.58#)


----------



## phalkon30 (Jan 17, 2009)

If it's the same line dropper post as the normal stache, I think that's almost 3/4 lb too.


----------



## Jesse845 (Nov 6, 2012)

upstateSC-rider said:


> I actually test rode a Deadwood today, my first + bike, on a real trail. I really can't compare it to a stache because I've only ridden one in a parking lot. I love the roll-over capabilities of the bike (came with 2.6 Rekons), but like chelboed said, you really can't get too rowdy on it, you can go fast but not rowdy
> The thing has grip for days, I could brake way later going into a fast and sketchy corners than my Jet 9 with 2.35's.
> 
> If I could fit 2.6's on my old Jet 9 RDO I think I'd be set for life, does it mean I have to start looking for a Trail bike capable of running 2.6's rather than buying a Plus bike capable of running bigger tires than I will probably use.
> I think so.


I fit 29x2.6 Nobby nics on my '13 Trek Rumblefish. The frame actually fit a 29x3 Dirt wizard but the non-boost fork didn't have the clearance. What year is you Jet 9? I have 29x2.6 on my '17 Jet 9 with plenty of clearance.


----------



## noosa2 (May 20, 2004)

Took a 19.5" Full Stache for a parking lot test today. The suspension felt great over curbs and down a set of stairs. Even in the parking lot test the low POE hub was noticeable. I would also feel better with a shorter stem and wider bars.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I think I'll keep it 









Swapped wheels, Duroc 40/DT 350/XR4 x 3", disabled the Knock Block temporally so I could use the bar/stem from the Wozo until my new bar and stem arrive. Bike comes with a 60mm stem, I found a knock block 50mm on eBay; 40mm are no where to be found.

Bike in a size large comes with 175mm cranks, 6000 series aluminum DUB, which are way too long for me, so they'll be swapped for 165mm GX.

I ran it in the low position, stock 130mm Pike, I'll probably bump it to 140mm though I'm curious how a 44mm offset would ride.

In a large frame, 175mm cranks, 32" inseam, I easily have the room for 175mm Dropper.

If the Fatillac is the short chainstay monster truck of BFat, the Full Stache is the short chainstay monster truck of 29+. This bike hauls arse, obliterates chunk, laughs at drops, blows through scree like a hot knife through butter. It's my kind of bike.

Oh, and to the poor saps who called the Trek Superstores this weekend hoping to find a size Large Full Stache only to learn it had been sold... yeah, that was me 

Next shipment arrives mid summer, what a bummer.


----------



## gpgalanis (Apr 7, 2015)

This is almost the prefect bike for me. And I say almost because I would prefer it to be at least 140 rear (160 front would be welcome) and also for the XL size I would like a much shorter seat tube than 520mm in order to use a longer dropper post.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I thought the same until I rode it. I switched from getting a Ripmo 160/150 to the Full Stache, previously rode a 150/150 Fatillac. I wouldn't refuse more travel out back, but I don't feel like I need it. Oddly enough, the 130 up front feels way more usable than the 130 on the front of my Hendrix; same fork.



gpgalanis said:


> This is almost the prefect bike for me. And I say almost because I would prefer it to be at least 140 rear (160 front would be welcome) and also for the XL size I would like a much shorter seat tube than 520mm in order to use a longer dropper post.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

chelboed said:


> According to Bikemag, the Full Stache is 33.4#.
> 
> Save 0.8# going tubeless.
> 
> ...


I'm telling you that I started with most of that: carbon bars, XT brakes, light wheels and saddle, and it's 32#. Chupas would indeed drop a bunch but they'd fundamentally change the ride, not always for the better.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

I'd like to see that build out.

My poor 2016 21.5 regular stache weighs just a hair under 30 right now mainly because of the tires (minions). 

It does seem that the full stache is begging for XR4/Minion size rubber.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Agreed, I would never run Chupas on the Full Stache, the bike is far more capable than the Chupa; hell, the Stache is more capable that a Chupa. You'd have to run high pressures on the Chupas to prevent slop and you most assuredly are going to flat those tires if you ride the bike at it's potential. XR4 or Minions.

I'm gonna get a weight on mine this week, not that I care (I don't), but for those who want to know I'll cave.

Full carbon with a carbon frame; if they build it, would certainly get you to the vaunted 28ish#. I think you all worry to much about weight. Performance has it's costs. An XC bike would be lighter, as would a road bike 

Personally, I'm more curious about how it would ride with a reduced offset fork.



mikesee said:


> I'm telling you that I started with most of that: carbon bars, XT brakes, light wheels and saddle, and it's 32#. Chupas would indeed drop a bunch but they'd fundamentally change the ride, not always for the better.


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

I also highly doubt a 28 pound build would be possible, without either spending a ton of money or making too many compromises.

For comparison, the build below for my FS 29+ came in at 29.12 pounds, but it started with a frame that from what I've read was probably around a pound lighter than the full stache.

Derby AM 40i Rims
P321 Hubs
Sapim cx-ray
Fox Factory dropper, fork, & shock
X01 Eagle shifter, derailleur, chain, and cassette
Next SL g4 cranks with 30t ring
29x3.0 Bontrager XR2
XTR Race Brakes with 180 f/r
XTR pedals
Specialized S-Works Power Saddle
Syntace Megaforce 2 Stem
Enve Bars
ESI Grips


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

mikesee said:


> I'm telling you that I started with most of that: carbon bars, XT brakes, light wheels and saddle, and it's 32#. Chupas would indeed drop a bunch but they'd fundamentally change the ride, not always for the better.





Nurse Ben said:


> Agreed, I would never run Chupas on the Full Stache, the bike is far more capable than the Chupa; hell, the Stache is more capable that a Chupa. You'd have to run high pressures on the Chupas to prevent slop and you most assuredly are going to flat those tires if you ride the bike at it's potential. XR4 or Minions.
> 
> I'm gonna get a weight on mine this week, not that I care (I don't), but for those who want to know I'll cave.
> 
> ...


I actually like the Chup's so far. I run them at 15'ish and haven't burped anything on drops and they haven't really squirmed on me. I'm not riding DH in Colorado though. I'm riding Midwest where I have to essentially pedal my whole ride. The ups are punchy and the DH's are very short. This is why weight matters here. No matter what though I think the bike even in stock form would be fun..



Nurse Ben said:


> Full carbon with a carbon frame; if they build it, would certainly get you to the vaunted 28ish#.


I don't know why it would be "vaunted". I just threw that number out there because I think it would be do'able. It's not a braggart comment...so being judged as vaunted is senseless.



Nurse Ben said:


> I think you all worry to much about weight.


I don't worry about it at all. I do know however that a 29# bike feels way worse than a 24# bike on our trails. I don't get to experience that climb for a couple hours / descent for 45 minutes feeling, so there's never a point where saving weight is not worth it unless you go stupid light and blow your bike out on one of the idiotic 5'-to-flat drops that some of the people think are okay to build around here. (I hate drops to flat )

Anyhoo...fun bike, hope to see more life experience instead of having to speculate so much.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Thanks for your input, I'm sure Trek will review all of our comments before they plan for the bikes revision in the coming months.



chelboed said:


> I actually like the Chup's so far. I run them at 15'ish and haven't burped anything on drops and they haven't really squirmed on me. I'm not riding DH in Colorado though. I'm riding Midwest where I have to essentially pedal my whole ride. The ups are punchy and the DH's are very short. This is why weight matters here. No matter what though I think the bike even in stock form would be fun..
> 
> I don't know why it would be "vaunted". I just threw that number out there because I think it would be do'able. It's not a braggart comment...so being judged as vaunted is senseless.
> 
> ...


----------



## beastmaster (Sep 19, 2012)

I saw the Full Stache today. As it comes out of the box, it is a boat anchor. But a quick viewing of the bike as is shows that it could loose 3-4lbs easily. Switch out the Bontrager dropper to a FOX Transfer, the saddle, the whole cockpit, possibly the brakes (from a review I saw, they are underpowered anyway), definitely the wheels (and not to something from Bontrager), possibly the tires (WTB Ranger in 3" are great on my Stache SS), and that should do it! Or just wait for the 9.8, which will come at some point.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Nothing wrong with the brakes and the frame does not flex. Ya gotta read reviews with an eye to the reviewer; ie do they typically ride plus or fat?

The pads needed bedding-in, mine were atrocious out of the box. A little vertical and they stopped just like Guides. The Guides are a very common brake, it would be exceedingly unusual for them to work on other bikes and not in this one.

Frame flex “improved” by swapping to stiffer wheels, yeah, Mikesee mentioned that comment earlier in this thread. I’m a big guy, was sticking all kinds of weird, off camber, flat landings and the frame was solid. Again, stiffening the frame by changing wheels really doesn’t make sense. The “remaining” flex was imagined or in the tires. Quite frankly, this 8# frame is quite burly.

But hey, believe the reviews, that’s what they get paid for 😜

It’s the same weight as my Hendrix.

You could certainly cut weight by installing lighter tires, upping the carbon factor, etc...

I’m in $4500 with wheels, cranks, stem, bars, pedals, I’ll probably build a skinny wheelset with XR4 2.6 for epics, maybe get a 170-175mm Dropper, or not.

So does anyone know if there is a 29+ fork with a 44/46mm offset? I read about there being reduced offset forks, but I can’t find specifics.


----------



## noosa2 (May 20, 2004)

Anyone running a full stache with regular (non-plus) cranks? I ask because I spend lots of time climbing so if I can move the chainring in a bit I find my drive train typically lasts longer.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Umm, you realize there are only a few Full Stache in existence, right?

I know of two, my large in Carson City and a medium in Grand Junction. One medium was sold in San Diego and an XL is for sale at the Trek Superstore in San Diego. It also sounds like there are a couple for sale in Arizona.

The PF BB on the Full Stache will work with any crank as long as the arms clear the chainstay. Not sure why you'd need a narrower chainline, I have no problem with the standard offset SRAM DUB Descendent cranks, I can backpedal in the 50t for as long as I want without skipping or dropping into a smaller cog.

I think a Race Face would have a narrower Q, but you wouldn't know unless you try it.

I'm changing cranks to a GX Eagle DUB 165mm, but the offset and BB are unchanged.



noosa2 said:


> Anyone running a full stache with regular (non-plus) cranks? I ask because I spend lots of time climbing so if I can move the chainring in a bit I find my drive train typically lasts longer.


----------



## rjcobra (Mar 18, 2004)

Now that the new Stumpjumper has come out and Specialized claims it will take a 29 x 3.0 tire, what are everyone's thoughts vs the Full Stache?


----------



## cobi (Apr 29, 2008)

rjcobra said:


> Now that the new Stumpjumper has come out and Specialized claims it will take a 29 x 3.0 tire, what are everyone's thoughts vs the Full Stache?


Conlifcting info...... See the thread I started yesterday. Maybe will clear *some* 2.8's is the info I've gotten so far. Multiple websites (including Spec) appear to have it wrong or at least worded very confusingly.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Not surprised, the suspension design needed to clear a really tall tire is not something most mfgs are doing for "fun".

My thoughts: If Specialized designs a bike for 29+ and the chainstays are 335mm+, you can't really compare it to a Full Stache, the bikes are just too different.

Short chainstays and 29+ are unique, which makes the Full Stache unique, which is why I bought one.



cobi said:


> Conlifcting info...... See the thread I started yesterday. Maybe will clear *some* 2.8's is the info I've gotten so far. Multiple websites (including Spec) appear to have it wrong or at least worded very confusingly.


----------



## rjcobra (Mar 18, 2004)

My answer from Specialized:

Am I reading the info on the new Stumpjumper 29 correctly ?Can it really take a 29 x 3.0 tire?

Thank you so much for reaching out! Yes, you are correct that bike is advertised to fit up to a 3.0 tire in both the 27.5 and the 29 wheel sizes. Have a great day! 

Best,

Morgan

I'm still a bit dubious. My LBS doesn't have one yet to check it.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

rjcobra said:


> Now that the new Stumpjumper has come out and Specialized claims it will take a 29 x 3.0 tire, what are everyone's thoughts vs the Full Stache?


I mean the Full Stache was a nice bike, but it's so last week. Why are we even talking about it still?


----------



## beastmaster (Sep 19, 2012)

cobi said:


> Conlifcting info...... See the thread I started yesterday. Maybe will clear *some* 2.8's is the info I've gotten so far. Multiple websites (including Spec) appear to have it wrong or at least worded very confusingly.


From the Specialized website: "both 27.5 and 29 frames can fit up to 3.0" tires" and "You'll still want to check with your fork manufacturer to make sure a high-volume tire can fit, but this should be music to everyone's ears." -- Doesn't appear to "have it wrong or worded confusingly."

New SJ has a 437mm chainstay length. New Full Stache has a 427mm chainstay length. 10mm isn't much. The questions are; what are the front centers and rear center on both bikes. Specialized lists front center for the new SJ but Trek doesn't--neither have the rear center information. The bottom bracket on the new Full Stache does appear to be closer to the rear than the new SJ.

Yesterday I rode the new Full Stache around a parking lot. Not much of an impression except for the weight (It was a boat anchor). This is a fairly inexpensive bike at $3700 full pop. Review on Bike Mag says frame and wheels are both flexy.

The new SJ Expert build is $5500 for a full carbon frame AND carbon wheels. The review posted on MTBR says the frame is noticeably stiffer from previous bike.

Therefore, we will have to wait for proper reviews on the new SJ to see if it is as good as it appears. That said, to upgrade the new Full Stache to reduce its problematic weight issues and eliminated the flexy wheels would cost more than the price difference between these two bikes. Let the games begin!

--I own a 2017 aluminum Stache built up as a single speed.


----------



## cobi (Apr 29, 2008)

beastmaster said:


> From the Specialized website: "both 27.5 and 29 frames can fit up to 3.0" tires" and "You'll still want to check with your fork manufacturer to make sure a high-volume tire can fit, but this should be music to everyone's ears." -- Doesn't appear to "have it wrong or worded confusingly."


This is exactly why I said to look at the thread I started yesterday (because I found that same info already). Here's the link.... You'll also see mention of the ones that are worded confusingly (other websites, not spec).

I have a local dealer saying "100% it will NOT fit, the specialized website is WRONG". I'm not saying I'm right...... but I'm leaning right now towards believing what someone who has the bike on his floor and has attempted to test fit a 29x3 is telling me over what may be copy/pasted between Specialized 27.5/29 model websites...... at least until someone can confirm once and for all. I posted a question on their Facebook page on the announcement thread earlier... haven't seen a reply yet.

He's been trying to sell me a bike for years and is my go-to shop.... unfortunately (for him) I've had no interest in Spec or his other brand. He know's I'm only interested in 29x3 compatibility right now.... so he has no reason to lie to me.... if it fits he knows I'd probably be down there with my $$ on the counter ASAP.


----------



## cobi (Apr 29, 2008)

rjcobra said:


> My answer from Specialized:
> 
> Am I reading the info on the new Stumpjumper 29 correctly ?Can it really take a 29 x 3.0 tire?
> 
> ...


Missed this reply..... interesting... I guess I'm just gonna have to see it with my own eyes. Like I said above my dealer is saying "no way it will fit" and he's been waiting for me to buy something from him for a while! Maybe he just doesn't like me (entirely possible).


----------



## beastmaster (Sep 19, 2012)

cobi said:


> This is exactly why I said to look at the thread I started yesterday (because I found that same info already). Here's the link.... You'll also see mention of the ones that are worded confusingly (other websites, not spec).
> 
> I have a local dealer saying "100% it will NOT fit, the specialized website is WRONG". I'm not saying I'm right...... but I'm leaning right now towards believing what someone who has the bike on his floor and has attempted to test fit a 29x3 is telling me over what may be copy/pasted between Specialized 27.5/29 model websites...... at least until someone can confirm once and for all. I posted a question on their Facebook page on the announcement thread earlier... haven't seen a reply yet.
> 
> He's been trying to sell me a bike for years and is my go-to shop.... unfortunately (for him) I've had no interest in Spec or his other brand. He know's I'm only interested in 29x3 compatibility right now.... so he has no reason to lie to me.... if it fits he knows I'd probably be down there with my $$ on the counter ASAP.


I am not a fan of Specialized any more or less than I like any other bicycle brand out there. That said, I would find it highly unlikely Specialized would misrepresent their product in this way. If they claim it can fit 3.0" tires in the rear without problems, it probably does. Why don't you go down to your LBS and mount a 3.0 tire on a 34-40mm wheel and find out for yourself.


----------



## noosa2 (May 20, 2004)

Nurse Ben said:


> Umm, you realize there are only a few Full Stache in existence, right?


Yeah, but I also saw that Mikesee said the frames sold out immediately so I figured guys are building them up. 
I'm really enjoying my half plus Canfield Riot and think I would enjoy it more with a plus rear tire so the full stache has me interested.
I'm also not familiar with PF BB's and the stories of creaking have me a bit nervous about pulling the trigger.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

So much angst over the little things, PF B.B.s are fine, certainly not a reason to dismiss a bike. 

Is 10mm difference in chainstay length noticeable? Yes, very much so, that’s the difference between a Mutz and a Hendrix; good luck getting a Mutz to manual.

Flex, what Flex?

Don’t believe what you read in reviews. The same guy who said the frame was flexy, then changed wheels and said the flex improved. Does that even make sense? It wasn’t the frame, doh!

The only thing I’d say negative about the Full Stache is the rear end is hefty. 

Taken as a whole package, it’s s nice bike if you want a 29+ full suspension bike.

But like Vic said, the Full Stache is so much yesterday’s news


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Don't need to do that much work, just use s tape measure and see how much space the bike has in the swing arm. A 29 x 3" XR4 has a radius of ~ 15.5", add 1/2" for mud clearance. Width is just shy of 3" on a Duroc 40mm rim.

Report back with pics, air down the shock and cycle the suspension of they'll let you, measure clearance of the stock 29 x 2.5



beastmaster said:


> I am not a fan of Specialized any more or less than I like any other bicycle brand out there. That said, I would find it highly unlikely Specialized would misrepresent their product in this way. If they claim it can fit 3.0" tires in the rear without problems, it probably does. Why don't you go down to your LBS and mount a 3.0 tire on a 34-40mm wheel and find out for yourself.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

rjcobra said:


> My answer from Specialized:
> 
> Am I reading the info on the new Stumpjumper 29 correctly ?Can it really take a 29 x 3.0 tire?
> 
> ...


So I'm looking at the first look article here on this site and they have a picture captioned with 29x3 would be mighty tight. I hope it's true though, I'd love to have some options. I could see it maybe fitting a chupa but definitely not an xr4 or minion based on that picture.


----------



## beachbum1 (Oct 2, 2012)

NurseBen,
Please do us a favor and keep the condescending comments to a minimum. Most of us here are just trying to learn and share information. Please see the below comments from you on this page alone. No need to reply back about me finding something better to do than to cut and paste peoples responses. Thanks in advance. 

"But seriously dude, you got multiple people responding to your statements and they all said the same thing."

"See, that's where you are very wrong."

"Thanks for your input, I'm sure Trek will review all of our comments before they plan for the bikes revision in the coming months."

"Umm, you realize there are only a few Full Stache in existence, right?"

"So much angst over the little things,"


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

At least he's not calling us assholes like the guy in the RSD Big Chief thread.


----------



## beachbum1 (Oct 2, 2012)

NYrr496 said:


> At least he's not calling us assholes like the guy in the RSD Big Chief thread.


Yikes. You wonder if these folks would be so inflammatory if these conversations occurred in person.....


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

beachbum1 said:


> Yikes. You wonder if these folks would be so inflammatory if these conversations occurred in person.....


I bet not even a little.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

For me it's not so much about being inflammatory as it is fighting misinformation.

It's amazing how powerful a few off handed comments in a review can be and how the public responds to these comments.

I drove twenty hours to get my Full Stache. I test rode the bike and spent a few hours tweaking the bike before bringing it home. I then rode the bike back to back on trails I know.

... and yet the misinformation continues to flow from folks who have never seen the bike outside of an online review.

Is it condescending to criticize people who spout misinformation?

In person I'm a sweetheart, but I have my opinions and I stand by what I know and experience.

Do you honestly believe that Mike Curiak or myself would ride a bike that sucks? I'm not Mike, but if Mikey likes it, that means something.

"Condescending" comments aside, I generally enjoy discussing new bikes on MTBR, though admittedly I have a handful of folks blocked; as I'm sure sone folks have blocked moi 

Back to the topic at hand: all my build parts arrive today, GX Eagle DUB cranks 165mm, 26t oval chainring, 50mm knock block stem, Chromag Fubars 35mm, 140mm air shaft, and some pretty yellow pedals.

Already had a front flat, to big to patch, so it got plugged. Hopefully it was an anomaly, otherwise I'll be going back to Minions.

I'm holding off on trying a reduced offset crown, not necessary at this point. Bumped the flip chip to high, which should offset the increase in fork travel.

I'll get some solid B.B. height and pedal clearance which will make the bike much more backyard friendly.

Once the knock block is reinstalled, I gotta decide how to make it more friendly, might try to increase the cut out in the top cap so the rotation is a little friendlier to tight turns in tech.

Note that the CS is shortest in the high position.

70's in the high desert all weekend, gotta love spring. Epic ride is coming to Carson, gonna ride sweep, it gives me more time to smell the ?



beachbum1 said:


> Yikes. You wonder if these folks would be so inflammatory if these conversations occurred in person.....


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Nurse Ben said:


> For me it's not so much about being inflammatory as it is fighting misinformation.
> 
> ... and yet the misinformation continues to flow from folks who have never seen the bike outside of an online review.
> 
> Is it condescending to criticize people who spout misinformation?


Dude you are killing me with this stuff. In one thread you are asking for help understanding fork offsets while admitting you have no clear grasp of the subject and in another you are proclaiming 29+ bikes without a low offset fork won't ride well as if you were an expert on the topic.

I agree misinformation is bad, but clean up your own yard before you get on your neighbour's case about theirs.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Not sure what you mean? I ask questions to learn.

I have yet to say anything that's untrue? Having only ridden 29ers with the larger offset, I can't say that I know how different offsets ride.

The folks claiming smaller offsets are better are industry folks, if anything I'm questioning whether it's marketing bs.

I think Walt and others did a fine job of teaching the course.

So Vik, it's Fruday, maybe post less and go for a ride?



vikb said:


> Dude you are killing me with this stuff. In one thread you are asking for help understanding fork offsets while admitting you have no clear grasp of the subject and in another you are proclaiming 29+ bikes without a low offset fork won't ride well as if you were an expert on the topic.
> 
> I agree misinformation is bad, but clean up your own yard before you get on your neighbour's case about theirs.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

Nurse Ben said:


> it's Fruday, maybe post less and go for a ride?


You have over 20 posts in this thread and you feel like you're being defensive in about half of them like you're waiting for someone to rub your new precious through the rhubarb. The guy who tested this for Bikemag is a VERY good rider who tests a lot of bikes and he's fast. He probably did feel frame flex and wheel flex combined and he's good enough to notice. Changing the wheel made it less flexy over all- whats the problem here- it was a positive review. And he owns a regular stache so he's not anti-29+.  And read the comments on the video if you haven't yet- particularly his response to the question about his wrist getting hurt.

I don't recall anyone in here saying anything unfairly negative. The bike is an outlier - it's only natural for people to point out the positive and the negative.

So, Nurse, heal thyself- get in some bike rides. Congrats on your new toy, no one will attack it while you take a break. I'll do the same on my regular stache.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Am I the only one lol'ing at the train wreck that this thread turned into?


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

litespeedaddict said:


> Am I the only one lol'ing at the train wreck that this thread turned into?


No, you're not. I'm probably not helping. Sorry. Wonder what size tires are ideal for jumping a dumpster fire?


----------



## pOrk (Jan 16, 2015)

MrIcky said:


> No, you're not. I'm probably not helping. Sorry. Wonder what size tires are ideal for jumping a dumpster fire?


I don't know. Probably depends on how short your chainstays are. Anything longer than 435 will probably result in failure.


----------



## CBaron (May 7, 2004)

Nurse Ben said:


> For me it's not so much about being inflammatory as it is fighting misinformation.
> 
> It's amazing how powerful a few off handed comments in a review can be and how the public responds to these comments.
> 
> ...


I rarely ever get involved when the mud starts being slung. But I do have to comment that you (Nurse Ben) seemed to have handled that criticism very well. I expected you to come back with full fury and you didn't IMHO.

That being said, I wanted to also give my take (and possibly others?) on what it looked like to me.

Your replies came across to me as more of a confirmation bias based on the fact that you just purchased the bike (Full Stache). I.e. you just unloaded the money (and drove hours to get it) thus you needed to broadcast how good of a decision it was and how other perspectives where seemingly less valid. Whether, that was in fact true or not, I did agree that you were generally coming across a bit defensive.

As for MikeSee, he's an interesting one for me. As someone who has been hanging around the 29er scene since the very early 2000's, I've followed Mike closely for many years. I sorely miss the early days of the grungy 29er (only) forum. Additionally as a (former) frame-builder I've followed his travails thru his range of bike builds nearly 2 decades now. He's had many bikes and ridden them in a multitude of situations, and the one thing I've determined from my observations is that he and I don't have the same views on what we like/want/ride. I TOTALLY TRUST his perceptions...but I also know they ARE NOT FOR ME. We like different things, are sensitive to different things and generally ride different types of things. Thus he doesn't usually influence my perception on things too much when I'm out gathering information.

Nonetheless I hope things get back on track.

Cheers,
CJB


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

All I can say is 420!!


----------



## noosa2 (May 20, 2004)

richwolf said:


> All I can say is 420!!


The ideal chainstay length for a FS 29+ bike?


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

noosa2 said:


> The ideal chainstay length for a FS 29+ bike?


I was reefer ing to the headset component!


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

It's unfortunate when threads go awry, I think it undermines their value.

But this is an Internet forum with a bunch of anonymous folks posting from many walks of life, and under a wide range of circumstances.

Long weekend for me, putting up 600' of fence, going riding first, tweaking on the bike late last night, didn't get the air shaft swapped, but did discover that the SRAM Descent crank is not DUB; it's a much smaller diameter, so I need a B.B. to go with my GX DUB
165mm cranks

Swapped in a Line 50mm stem and a 35mm Chromag Fubar, Oval 26t chainring, and moved the flip chips to high. Of note, the stock Dropper on a large frame is 125mm, got a 170mm ordered; One Up, should be interesting.

Once the high country melts out I'll probably swap to a 2.6 unless there's a worthy 2.8; lI love 3" tires, but for long rides it's a lot of tire to haul around.

From the back porch:


----------



## noosa2 (May 20, 2004)

Nurse Ben said:


> It's unfortunate when threads go awry, I think it undermines their value.
> 
> But this is an Internet forum with a bunch of anonymous folks posting from many walks of life, and under a wide range of circumstances.
> 
> ...


Nice view. As I finished my ride today a guy was starting his ride on his new full stache. It was his first ride so he did not have any feedback but was very stocked as he said he loves his stache but has dreamed of a full suspension version.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Nurse Ben said:


> It's unfortunate when threads go awry, I think it undermines their value.
> 
> But this is an Internet forum with a bunch of anonymous folks posting from many walks of life, and under a wide range of circumstances.
> 
> ...


So what really is the point of getting the Full Stache if you could get a snappy fun dually that's running 2.6?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

chelboed said:


> So what really is the point of getting the Full Stache if you could get a snappy fun dually that's running 2.6?


Short chainstays and capacity for 3" tires is the draw of the Full Stache.

But I hear ya, the Full Stache is kind of a lateral move from a Fatillac, had my finger on the trigger for a Ripmo, but didn't want to wait and the ya gotta admit, Full Stache is pretty cool.

Still trying to decide how much tire I really want, thneed, pretty much set on 29, want one bike to rule them all..

Did a solid ride today, 20+ miles and 4K climbing, rode the XR4 x 3", which kinda cooked me considering the ride, so I swapped to XR4 x 2.6, gonna ride those for a bit once my B.B. shows up; 165mm cranks.

I did get some chain rub on the tire, it's something I think warrants a non boost chainring option unless you're running 2.6 tires.

I started the ride in the high position, flipped to low and preferred the feel. Gonna bump the fork to 140mm tomorrow night and ride it like that for a bit. The 130/130 stock travel ain't bad, mist folks would probably like it the way it comes.

Line 50mm lock block stem and 750 x 35 bars ride nice. The Lock block isn't a problem, I did some very tight switchbacks, the kinds that require a creeping sort of track stand, and I didn't hit the stops.

Stock suspension is sweet, haven't needed to lock it out, set the pressures and adjusted the fork rebound, then left it alone.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

Ben, have you thought about trying the XR2s?

After thousands of (sometimes very fast) miles in the SW on Chupacabras/XR2s, I'm a little curious about the need for big slow knobs on a 3" tire...seems like they would just make it roll slower.



mikesee said:


> If it's the rear wheel, how does changing frame material solve it?!


"for the most part"

Reading be fundamental.

As in, the line pro wheels are significantly stiffer than the stock wheels, but an alloy frame is never going to be as snappy as carbon...and as we all know, an elevated chainstay design loses a little stiffness. But you knew that, didn't you?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

The snow covered peak to the left is the back side of Heavenly. The TRT goes through the ski resort. I was riding Clear Creek trail earlier today, its being extended, we'll be able to ride from the valley floor to Heavenly, connecting with the TRT.



noosa2 said:


> Nice view. As I finished my ride today a guy was starting his ride on his new full stache. It was his first ride so he did not have any feedback but was very stocked as he said he loves his stache but has dreamed of a full suspension version.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

richde said:


> Ben, have you thought about trying the XR2s?
> 
> After thousands of (sometimes very fast) miles in the SW on Chupacabras/XR2s, I'm a little curious about the need for big slow knobs on a 3" tire...seems like they would just make it roll slower.


I've had my Stache since August of last year. Been riding stock Chupacabras the whole time. I gotta admit, I like the tires. I'm 215# running 15psi and I think they perform fine. No squirm. I like to ride hard. I like to tool around too. Running Arc40 wheelset makes them plenty stout in the corners for me.

I ride light in the saddle. I'm not a bulldozer. Been riding a hardtail most of the time since 1996. (I've had plenty of duallies during that time, but still always own and ride a hardtail or rigid)

I ride rocky, chunky terrain. Sharp stuff, rim killers...I think riding light in the saddle and focusing on picking a smart line makes a difference as to how your tires serve you.

I write an article/thread years ago to help new riders with tips and tricks that we seasoned old farts often take for granted. One thing I studied quite a bit was watching new riders/not-so-bright riders just bulldozer into baby-heads and roots without any weight transfer or finesse. Not that I'm a skill monster or anything, but I think the XR2 is more tire than people give it credit for.

If I never shred it, then I must not be riding hard: not necessarily.

If you're shedding it, then you're riding like a hack: possible, maybe not though


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

As I patiently wait for the carbon version, I will comment on my opinion of the Chupacabra's. I am running Chups on my 9.8 Stache and the Minion DHF/DHR combo on my Stache 7. I have very little confidence in the Chups on loose over hard especially the combination of pine straw, leaves, and sand over hard pack as the little knobs just can't find any grip. I also have issues climbing long, steep, loose hills that require standing up in low gear. 
The Minions just rail on almost everything and climb like a goat. I do feel the weight of the heavy bastards though.....


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

The Chupas don't have the traction for the type of riding I do, nor is the casing resilient enough to handle stupid abuse.

The Chupas are a fine tires, great balance of volume, traction, and low friction, but it's not a tire I'd run in the park, through scree fields at speed, or downhill on loose soils.

If the Chula is your kind of tire, more power to you.



richde said:


> Ben, have you thought about trying the XR2s?
> 
> After thousands of (sometimes very fast) miles in the SW on Chupacabras/XR2s, I'm a little curious about the need for big slow knobs on a 3" tire...seems like they would just make it roll slower.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

1996? Is that s long time ago?

I was riding bmx in the 70's, the old school stuff, throwing table tops, 360's, big air on little tires without suspension, bunny hopping 2-3' back before trials was a thing. We used to ride around pitching into trash cans with pegs; and get chased by the cops. Ah, those were the days.

I've rdden unicycles down stuff that most people walk, bikes are nothing.

Maybe I should write an article too



chelboed said:


> I've had my Stache since August of last year. Been riding stock Chupacabras the whole time. I gotta admit, I like the tires. I'm 215# running 15psi and I think they perform fine. No squirm. I like to ride hard. I like to tool around too. Running Arc40 wheelset makes them plenty stout in the corners for me.
> 
> I ride light in the saddle. I'm not a bulldozer. Been riding a hardtail most of the time since 1996. (I've had plenty of duallies during that time, but still always own and ride a hardtail or rigid)
> 
> ...


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

chelboed said:


> I think the XR2 is more tire than people give it credit for.


Totally agreed -- it's my go-to rear tire ~85% of the time. Fast, light, durable. But sometimes it's just not enough. Fortunately, for those times, we now have the XR-4.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Ben, you really gotta chill. You're not the only person that's been alive in the 70's. Keep bragging if you want man, but your attempt to be alpha is annoying.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Don't be so serious, no cares that we do what we do except us. So maybe I'm a hack, but I'm having fun, so I'm a funny hack 

Back to bike talk: Swapped air shafts to 140mm, gonna leave it in the low position, heading out for a quick loop with a solid climb and a rocky descent.

Enjoy what's left of the weekend.



chelboed said:


> Ben, you really gotta chill. You're not the only person that's been alive in the 70's. Keep bragging if you want man, but your attempt to be alpha is annoying.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Nurse Ben said:


> Don't be so serious, no cares that we do what we do except us. So maybe I'm a hack, but I'm having fun, so I'm a funny hack
> 
> .


Good point...and good reminder.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Oh yeah, the Trek Full Stache comes alive!

Stock fork increased to 140mm, flip chips in low, 26t oval + 10-50 Eagle, XR4 2.6

Climbs and handles awesome, descends like a big boy bike, just enough travel to handle big hits, never felt the need to lock out the suspension when climbing.

This bike is a plumb!

Would I take carbon for another 1k? Yes, but it needs to be light like the Slash, these big boned bikes are hauling enough wheel weight, frames should by light; 5-6#.

After trying a number of tire combos, Chupas, XR4 3” and 2.6”, I feel like the best all day tire for big climbs and big descents on an FS plus bike is the 2.6, for mellower terrain, multi day rides, I could ride the Chupas or a combo Chupa/XR4.

So I’m gonna keep the 2.6” on the Full Stache and the 3” on the Wozo.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

So what I guess I don't understand is...you've taken a Full Stache and turned it into a Fuel EX, seen surprised that it comes alive now... Except it's heavier.

Why not just buy a Fuel EX and run 2.6" tires?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Short chainstays and capacity for three inch tires is what shortages the two.

Yeah, it's a heavy frame, but at least it wasn't expensive.

I'd opt for a different frame, one that is lighter, if there was a better option.



chelboed said:


> So what I guess I don't understand is...you've taken a Full Stache and turned it into a Fuel EX, seen surprised that it comes alive now... Except it's heavier.
> 
> Why not just buy a Fuel EX and run 2.6" tires?


----------



## PoshJosh (Mar 30, 2007)

chelboed said:


> So what I guess I don't understand is...you've taken a Full Stache and turned it into a Fuel EX, seen surprised that it comes alive now... Except it's heavier.
> 
> Why not just buy a Fuel EX and run 2.6" tires?


:lol::lol:


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Nurse Ben said:


> Short chainstays and capacity for three inch tires is what shortages the two.
> 
> Yeah, it's a heavy frame, but at least it wasn't expensive.
> 
> I'd opt for a different frame, one that is lighter, if there was a better option.


No, I definitely get it. 3"capacity and short stays... But you aren't using the 3"capacity and the Fuel EX stays are only 5mm longer. This post is helpful in the fact that a parking lot test won't be sufficient. Riding up and down stairs won't answer the Q either.

I think for me, this is a definite "demo day" decision. If I feel as you do...the 3" tires turn it into too much of a dog, I would decide against it and look to the Fuel EX or one of just about any dually 29'er trail bike. So many more doors open there.

If I come back with the sensation that 3" tires are fine on it...then I'd use it for its intended purpose and monster truck the heck out of it.

Just reading what I've read about it steers me totally clear of a blind buy.

So for that Ben, I thank you. This was helpful.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

chelboed said:


> No, I definitely get it. 3"capacity and short stays... But you aren't using the 3"capacity and the Fuel EX stays are only 5mm longer. This post is helpful in the fact that a parking lot test won't be sufficient. Riding up and down stairs won't answer the Q either.
> 
> I think for me, this is a definite "demo day" decision.
> 
> .


This is where I am, but the demo day has to be in the right place too. I'm fascinated by this bike and the engineering is impressive. But for the trails I normally ride, I'd be way overbiked for all but 15%. And the demo days are always at the same trails. One of those places where they do a lot of demos has some built features with rocks and drops, but thats not where this is going to shine. I think I'll need to do a 2 day rental and go to the desert to see how this fits. It would probably be worth a $100 to make sure it's what I want.

All of that is played against the fact that a lot of new bikes will hold a real 29x2.6 pretty comfortably, which may be 'close enough' for me on a FS. Anyway- sounds like I have at least until August or so before I have to worry about making a decision.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Yup, that's about it, there's no magic in the ride or suspension, Trek, Specialized, Ibis, etc.. they can all build a decent short travel 29er.

Capacity for a tall tire like 29 x 3 and sub 430mm chainstays, that's the primary draw.

Other mfgs could do it, but non are doing it. If I only end up riding 2.6, then yeah, there lots of other choices with chainstays close to the same length (432-435).

If I had to buy this bike based solely on a parking lot test.... not sure I'd have done it, but I'm glad I did, it's gonna be a fun bike to ride and the price is fair.

It is certainly a monster truck, 2.6 or 3", it's a beast for bombing stuff, last night it slayed a bunch of ugly rocky dh that was half blind and equal nasty, so much fun to slash my through rock and sage, sliding the back end on scree, barely stay in the track.



chelboed said:


> No, I definitely get it. 3"capacity and short stays... But you aren't using the 3"capacity and the Fuel EX stays are only 5mm longer. This post is helpful in the fact that a parking lot test won't be sufficient. Riding up and down stairs won't answer the Q either.
> 
> I think for me, this is a definite "demo day" decision. If I feel as you do...the 3" tires turn it into too much of a dog, I would decide against it and look to the Fuel EX or one of just about any dually 29'er trail bike. So many more doors open there.
> 
> ...


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Nurse Ben said:


> build a decent short travel 29er.


130mm = short travel now?


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

Nurse Ben said:


> The Chupas don't have the traction for the type of riding I do, nor is the casing resilient enough to handle stupid abuse.
> 
> The Chupas are a fine tires, great balance of volume, traction, and low friction, but it's not a tire I'd run in the park, through scree fields at speed, or downhill on loose soils.
> 
> If the Chula is your kind of tire, more power to you.


I didn't see your frame of reference for 3.0 XR2s in this thread.

After 5,000+ miles on them in Ely, Las Vegas, SW Utah, Prescott and Flagstaff, I just don't see a weakness in XR2s. My other bike has Minions mounted up, so I'm not against aggressive treads in general.

I've cut one tire, which was my fault and I knew I screwed up the moment it happened, and it's not as if we don't have plenty of sharp rocks to scrape against here. We have WTB 27+ tires mounted on some of our rentals, and those are either very delicate or the customers are especially ham fisted, even though they don't manage to cut sidewalls at the same rate on rental Staches with XR2s. The WTBs, those I don't trust. Not sure how the construction of XR2s and XR4s differs either, since they're both listed as having "inner strength" construction.

So without a frame of reference to your experience with them, it seems like you're judging by appearances because both in my perception and objective results, they're as good, or better than traditional aggressive tires.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Okay, how about shorter than some 

I'll blame it on advertising.

So short does not equate to insufficient. Sometimes less is more. I think the Full Stache has just to right amount for how I ride.

I had a great ride last night, braaap!



mikesee said:


> 130mm = short travel now?


----------



## Fuzzwardo (Oct 16, 2013)

For those who have ridden the Full Stache, how does it compare to a 2014 Fuel Ex7? Still have my Fuel but am super curious about the Full Stache.


----------



## alexdi (Jun 25, 2016)

Does anyone know the maximum seatpost insertion length for this frame? I'm eyeing 185mm and 200mm droppers, I wonder if they'd fit in size L?


----------



## TheBaldBlur (Jan 13, 2014)

For those who've ridden the Full Stache: I've spent some time on a Stache HT and - for me - didn't like the riding position of sitting up on the bike rather than in it. Does the Full Stache ride the same way?


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

TheBaldBlur said:


> For those who've ridden the Full Stache: I've spent some time on a Stache HT and - for me - didn't like the riding position of sitting up on the bike rather than in it. Does the Full Stache ride the same way?


That's going to depend on where you place your contact points. Plus feel is quite subjective.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Like Mike said, contact points matter. So was the stem low? Stack is not high on the Full Stache, raising the bars could change that feel, shorter cranks, dropping the seat.

The 125mm stock dropper on the large Full Stache is not enough, I have a 170 on order.

I placed all three stock spacers under the stem, changed from a 60mm to a 50mm stem, and went from a flat bar to a +25mm. Waiting on a bb for 165mm cranks.

I did a solid after work ride last night, 3k climb, technical single track, nice long descent, ~fifteen miles and 2.5 hrs in the saddle, and the bike felt great, really railed the corners, bike responds well to a forward body position.

I do find that the bike rides rough over chunk at speed, running 2.6 certainly makes it rougher than 3". I played with tire pressure and suspension pressures, still got some room to soften things up, might pull a volume spacer or two.

I have very little time on a Stache.



TheBaldBlur said:


> For those who've ridden the Full Stache: I've spent some time on a Stache HT and - for me - didn't like the riding position of sitting up on the bike rather than in it. Does the Full Stache ride the same way?


----------



## mxr515 (Jan 20, 2015)

I've owned the Stache 9.7 and now the Full Stache and to me, both ride or feel like your riding higher than my Fuel 9.7 which takes some getting used to. Things I like about the Full Stache are the traction with the new tires vs the Chupacabra's, the bike rolls really well once moving along and the suspension works very well. Seems to me that the larger wheels/tires requires a little more input to get going than I remember on the Stache 9.7 but may just have been how I felt the day I had it out as that never bothered me on the Stache HT. The only other comment I have so far is that the front end felt much lighter on my Stache 9.7 than on the Full Stache but my sag and seat placement still need to be set for me as they were just ball parked for the first ride. Only changes I've made to the bike are to ditch the stock seat and I'm leaning towards upgrading the wheels on the Full Stache to the Line Pro Carbons in the near future to see how that helps.



mikesee said:


> That's going to depend on where you place your contact points. Plus feel is quite subjective.


Quote Originally Posted by TheBaldBlur View Post
For those who've ridden the Full Stache: I've spent some time on a Stache HT and - for me - didn't like the riding position of sitting up on the bike rather than in it. Does the Full Stache ride the same way?


----------



## alexdi (Jun 25, 2016)

Let's not even bother.


----------



## tmbrown (Jun 9, 2007)

Really… A parking lot review… WTF.


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

That’s what I was thinking. Pretty sure every bike I’ve ridden in the parking lot was awesome. Jeez ...


----------



## alexdi (Jun 25, 2016)

I didn't say I stayed in the lot.  Plenty of crap surrounding it. But yeah, take it for what it's worth.


----------



## bikeny (Feb 26, 2004)

alexdi said:


> I didn't say I stayed in the lot.  Plenty of crap surrounding it. But yeah, take it for what it's worth.





alexdi said:


> I gave the 19.5" FS a parking lot demo today.


----------



## alexdi (Jun 25, 2016)

bikeny said:


>


Yeah, that's enough. About two people have ridden the thing. I thought some folks might appreciate some notes about suspension, weight, and size, but I guess not. I just pulled the post to save y'all the trouble of complaining.


----------



## PoshJosh (Mar 30, 2007)

Ride the bike where it was meant to be ridden and get back to us.


----------



## cwtch (Apr 26, 2018)

to my surprise this is a fun bike to ride. my everyday trail bike is a santa cruz 5010 and so when i got the chance to demo a full stache i didn't think i would like it. plus tyres are not really my thing. it was fun though and nimble enough to throw about a bit. it climb techy stuff well and descended pretty good for the travel it has. the full stache didnt mind getting off the ground but for me was more difficult to huck than my other bikes. but fair play it weighs more and i only rode it for one twelve mile outing. it rolled over everything quite well.
i wouldnt buy one but it was fun and for some might be the perfect bike. if you get a chance ride one. 
they look good and have nice specs and found the tyres to corner proper.
if in arizona i know of two shops that have some on the floor.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

The Full Stache rides like a full suspension 29+ bike, heavy, stable, solid.

With a little more travel up front, dropping the rear into low, and swapping to 2.6 tires, the Full Stache changes faces and gets racey and rides more like an enduro. 

What I like about the Full Stache is the agility with short chainstays, the ability to change the suspension on the trail, and the option to run fatter tires. It's very likely that I'll get another wheelset to run a Chupa/Chupa for bike packing.

I have a hundred miles of single track on the Full Stache, lots of climbing, plenty of up and down tech, some jumping, bike rides really well. I'd take a carbon frame for 3k, but the aluminum is fine for now.

As I look around at all the 29ers being sold, I still don't see a 29+ that has the short chainstays of the Full Stache, so it really is a bike that stands alone.

I'd like to see the Full Stache sold with 29 x 2.8 tire for front use, 2.6 out back, that would make for a nice all mountain ripper.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

The 3.0 tires define the full stache imo. I don't know why you'd want to go 2.6/2.8. That seems like the Fuel or Slash would be a better choice for 2.6ish. The Fuel is a little tight with 2.6 but can handle xr4s and the Slash handles them easy.

I haven't ridden a full stache, so I could be way off base but it seems like the 3.0s are the whole point and everything else on the bike was chosen to make those work.

The chainstays are a little shorter, 427 vs 432 (fuel) 433 (slash) but 6mm isn't going to be a deal breaker.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Agreed.

Slash is tight with a 2.6, Fuel will fit 2.8 and 3" is tight. There are a bunch of bikes that'll take 2.6 out back, but none have a CS shorter than 430mm.

I rode a new Specialized 29er LT last night, it was spec'd with 2.6 on 30mm id rims. It rode very nice, super stiff, very responsive, I didn't refuse to ride the bike 

To some folks 6mm is not a lot, but I find that it makes a difference, esp when I'm used to bikes with a 420mm CS.

I'm in Mikesee's camp, I like short chainstays, have yet to ride a bike with chainstays that are too short.

So yeah, the real value in the Stache/Full Stache is the ability to run 3" tires. Two wheels sets would let me do what I'm doing now and what I might want to do down the road. I can see running 3" in the winter when it's sloppy and certainly for sandier rides or bike packing.



MrIcky said:


> The 3.0 tires define the full stache imo. I don't know why you'd want to go 2.6/2.8. That seems like the Fuel or Slash would be a better choice for 2.6ish. The Fuel is a little tight with 2.6 but can handle xr4s and the Slash handles them easy.
> 
> I haven't ridden a full stache, so I could be way off base but it seems like the 3.0s are the whole point and everything else on the bike was chosen to make those work.
> 
> The chainstays are a little shorter, 427 vs 432 (fuel) 433 (slash) but 6mm isn't going to be a deal breaker.


----------



## PHeller (Dec 28, 2012)

So its a combination of the short stays and big clearance that make the Full Stache, not neccesarily one or the other. 

If your the type who loves 29x3 and never would ride anything else, then a Full Stache it is. 

As far as the short chainstay are concerned, is the Full Stache the current winner in terms of production bikes?


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

PHeller said:


> So its a combination of the short stays and big clearance that make the Full Stache, not neccesarily one or the other.
> 
> If your the type who loves 29x3 and never would ride anything else, then a Full Stache it is.
> 
> As far as the short chainstay are concerned, is the Full Stache the current winner in terms of production bikes?


I couldn't find any FS 29ers with shorter stays (let alone 29+). I could be wrong but they're definitely amongst the shortest. Same goes for the regular stache and 29ers (or 29+).


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

PHeller said:


> As far as the short chainstay are concerned, is the Full Stache the current winner in terms of production bikes?


For FS non-plus tires? If so the Canfield Riot has 414mm CS.


----------



## noosa2 (May 20, 2004)

MrIcky said:


> I couldn't find any FS 29ers with shorter stays (let alone 29+). I could be wrong but they're definitely amongst the shortest. Same goes for the regular stache and 29ers (or 29+).


I think the Canfield Riot has shorter stays but you cannot fit a plus tire on it.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

That's impressive. I don't see many (any?) Canfields in my area. But 414 vs 427 is almost exactly the 1/2 inch difference for plus. Is that about as short as you can reasonably get?


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

MrIcky said:


> That's impressive. I don't see many (any?) Canfields in my area. But 414 vs 427 is almost exactly the 1/2 inch difference for plus. Is that about as short as you can reasonably get?


On a production bike, I think so, because you have to keep reasonable chain/tire/chainring clearances.

With custom you can go much shorter, as long as you're willing to accept other compromises -- smaller max chainring size, less tire clearance to frame and chain.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

vikb said:


> For FS non-plus tires? If so the Canfield Riot has 414mm CS.





mikesee said:


> On a production bike, I think so, because you have to keep reasonable chain/tire/chainring clearances.
> 
> With custom you can go much shorter, as long as you're willing to accept other compromises -- smaller max chainring size, less tire clearance to frame and chain.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Mike has some useful 29+ comparo comments on the Full Stache here:
Big Wheel Building: 29+ fullies: 3 bike review.


----------



## pOrk (Jan 16, 2015)

vikb said:


> Mike has some useful 29+ comparo comments on the Full Stache here:
> Big Wheel Building: 29+ fullies: 3 bike review.


Great review. My problem with Mikesee reviews is that his writing style is so effective and based in what appears to be pure love of the sport, i can easily look st the bank account justify his recommendations.

Ive been sold on and impressed with 27.5x3 and am really interested in 29x3 being a perfect balance. My current bike can only handle 29x2.6/8. Thats the next experiment before another unnecessary purchase is made.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

pOrk said:


> Great review. My problem with Mikesee reviews is that his writing style is so effective and based in what appears to be pure love of the sport, i can easily look st the bank account justify his recommendations.


If you happen to be Mike's size you can always score one of his used bikes. He let's them go at pretty decent prices.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Nice review Mike. I enjoyed every word. You're wisdom comes from obvious experience versus E-sperience.

Thanks, dood.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Yeah, Mike knows 29+, his experience and impressions are spot on.

Which bike you choose depends on your preferences.

I’m really digging the Full Stache, but I can see a couple places where it could be improved, that doesn’t make it a bad bike.

Right now I’m a bit frustrated with 29+ tire options. Minions are the obvious choice for DH oriented riding, but 3” tires are a bit much. The Bontrager tires are leaving me wanting, holed two in under two weeks, so I’m done there. Just installed some Rekon 2.6, great tires, rode a set of 27 x 2.8 into the ground and never cut one, but the 29 x 2.6 measures out narrow.

We need some burly 2.6-2.8 options, maybe they’re coming ....


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Held a 17.5 frame last night at my shop and wasn't terribly turned off by the weight of it. Quality looked very nice as well.


----------



## TheBaldBlur (Jan 13, 2014)

Nurse Ben said:


> We need some burly 2.6-2.8 options, maybe they're coming ....


Ben, take a look at the Terrene Chunk, they just announced a 29x2.6 version. I'm running it in 27.5x3.0 on the front and really like it a lot. If they hold to form, it'll run slightly bigger than stated size and maybe come in at about 2.65 width.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Picked up a set of Rekon 29 x 2.6 60tpi, took a beating today, not heavy but also not that wide. I considered the Terrence McFly, but didn’t think they’d be all that. A Chunk 2.6 would be worthy, I may pop for one up front.


----------



## rth009 (May 20, 2010)

vikb said:


> If you happen to be Mike's size you can always score one of his used bikes. He let's them go at pretty decent prices.


I've wished I could fit on one a few times over the years


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Nurse Ben said:


> The Bontrager tires are leaving me wanting, holed two in under two weeks, so I'm done there.


Jeez dude -- learn to unweight the bike! A good carpenter doesn't blame his tools and all that...


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Uh huh, just threw away a set of thread bare 27+ Rekon with hundreds of hard miles, miles, this carpenter did fine on them tires... so I went and got a set in 29 x 2.6 60tpi and rode them today. Bomber tire. No holes 

So I got some barely used XR4 29 x 3 (sold) and XR4 28 x 2.6 (available)
for sale, the holed tires are free with the purchase of a non holed tire. Holed tires were plugged and seal up tubeless. Also got a set of barely used Chupas without holes, figure I might as well sell em before I ruin em.



mikesee said:


> Jeez dude -- learn to unweight the bike! A good carpenter doesn't blame his tools and all that...


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Here´s my Full Stache



















Picked it up a week ago in size 19.5. Weight at the moment is 14,8 kg pedals included.
Changes:
- Truvativ Descendant carbon crank with 170 mm
- Truvativ Descendant carbon riser and Descendant stem
- Shimano XT brakes with 203 mm/180 mm rotors
- tubeless of course
In a few days i will get a 1600 gr wheelset with carbon rims and hubs. I guess this will reduce the weight to about 13,7 or so KGs. Climbing is better than I expected, but for sure you feel the weight of the bike. I´m expecting an improvement as soon as the much lighter wheelset has arrived. When the trail goes down this bike is really a imperturbable beast and I´m happy to have enough breaking power with the XT brakes. I was also thinking to use other/lighter tires on the carbon wheels, but I also don´t want to "castrate" the Full Stache. So in a first step I will leave it with the XR4´s to find out how this is going to work with the new wheelset. What I can say after only a few runs with the Full Stache: this bike is really, really fun!


----------



## noosa2 (May 20, 2004)

Geniusbiker said:


> Here´s my Full Stach:
> - Truvativ Descendant carbon riser and Descendant stem
> What I can say after only a few runs with the Full Stache: this bike is really, really fun!


Hey Geniusbiker, how were you able to use a non-knock block stem? Were you able to find a knock block adapter spacer?


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

noosa2 said:


> Hey Geniusbiker, how were you able to use a non-knock block stem? Were you able to find a knock block adapter spacer?


Yes, that was no problem. My LBS has the knock block adapter spacer in stock.


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Nurse Ben said:


> The 125mm stock dropper on the large Full Stache is not enough, I have a 170 on order.


Today I contacted Trek´s customer service to ask for the length of the dropper post in size 19.5 - answer: 150 mm. This means that my Full Stache also came with the wrong one; mine has only 125 mm. The helpful person on the phone recommended to officially claim this at my LBS and they soon will send the right one with 150 mm.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Well then, I'll contact them and see how it goes.



Geniusbiker said:


> Today I contacted Trek´s customer service to ask for the length of the dropper post in size 19.5 - answer: 150 mm. This means that my Full Stache also came with the wrong one; mine has only 125 mm. The helpful person on the phone recommended to officially claim this at my LBS and they soon will send the right one with 150 mm.


----------



## russmu66 (Nov 11, 2007)

My large Full Stache (in Australia) also came with a 125 mm dropper. I'll also look into it.
Cheers.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Installed SRAM GX DUB 165mm cranks, it was a bit of a pain to get the original 24mm B.B. out; all my removal tools are for larger B.B. sizes, but I finally got it out undamaged, then popped the new DUB B.B. into place.

DUB cranks are different than standard GX/GXP, the B.B. was flush mount with internal bearings, the spindle has a spacer (thin or thick) and the non drive arm has a threaded tensioner like a Race Face.

The crank fit perfectly with the thinner spacer, crank arms clear the chainstays by 10mm or so.

Pedal clearance increased by 10mm over the stock crank.

Eyeballing the chain line, it appears to be slightly more outboard, didn’t change the shifting, but chain to tire clearance is better.

Still waiting for my big dropper, contemplating a reduced offset steerer, looking at a more aggressive front tire.

Fun bike for sure.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Nurse Ben said:


> Still waiting for my big dropper


I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Wondering why people need/how people can use more than ~125mm or so of drop. Do your dangly bits not interface with the rear tire? Do you never end up buzzing your sphincter with knobbage?

I bounce back and forth between 100 and 125mm of drop. I've owned a few 150mm droppers and can't say that I ever needed the extra. But when using the full 150mm I find that I can (and have) had the above scenarios happen. Good thing I was wearing a chamois to keep the jewels tucked up tight -- they coulda gotten wedged between the tire and seatstay bridge. Sort of a "How'd you get the frank below the beans?" scenario.

In trying to find a use for more, I thought "Aha! It's for getting the bike into a small car!" Turns out it doesn't help that much because the bars are almost always going to be higher and they're the limiter WRT in-vehicle space.

I can definitely see where the more drop you have the easier it is to sit on the saddle and have your feet flat on the ground. But I'm not sure that's the selling point.

Not suggesting people can't or shouldn't have as much as they want. Just scratching my head on where/how it's being used.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Yeah, dropper posts are not an essential component, I didn't own one until four years ago, then got accustomed to using it and ended up liking droppers quite a bit.

No dangly parts getting in the way, never had the "frank and beans" issues, mostly I like a dropper to get the seat out of the way when getting back, the advantage being I can get back AND stay low.

So far I have not buzzed myself on the tire 

And no, dropping the seat so I can have my feet on the ground is not an advantage, feet on the ground = no butt on the seat.

I only had 125mm on the Fatillac, I was coming from bikes with 150mm, so I missed that little extra drop.

Currently running 125mm on the Full Stache, got a 170mm coming, looking forward to a long drop.

I don't always use the full drop, I'd say most of the time I use the dropper to tweak the saddle height by 10-25mm; which is why I didn't end up liking the E13 dropper so much as it has preset drops that don't always fit my desires.

My biggest future query is what will they think of next?



mikesee said:


> I've been thinking about this a lot lately. Wondering why people need/how people can use more than ~125mm or so of drop. Do your dangly bits not interface with the rear tire? Do you never end up buzzing your sphincter with knobbage?
> 
> I bounce back and forth between 100 and 125mm of drop. I've owned a few 150mm droppers and can't say that I ever needed the extra. But when using the full 150mm I find that I can (and have) had the above scenarios happen. Good thing I was wearing a chamois to keep the jewels tucked up tight -- they coulda gotten wedged between the tire and seatstay bridge. Sort of a "How'd you get the frank below the beans?" scenario.
> 
> ...


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

I think dropper travel requirements changes with rider height. Very tall riders can drop a bunch more than someone like me because they start off so far above the tire


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

Yes, those of us who are tall with long legs can appreciate the additional drop. I run 175 on one bike and will run the same on my second. 

I have had some gooch buzz when pulling up hard for drops or jumps. That’s not related to dropper size.


----------



## dynomatt (Jan 27, 2009)

In the collective experience of the brains trust, what’s the likelihood of a carbon frame and when? Have Trek got precedent for launching an alloy frame and then offering a carbon? If so, how long or how many units would they have to sell of the alloy FS8?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I was told there was a two year gap between the aluminum Stache and the carbon Stache.


----------



## dynomatt (Jan 27, 2009)

Thanks Ben...maybe I'll pull the trigger on an alloy and upgrade down the track.


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Last week I was able to mount my new just over 1600 gr wheelset on the Full Stache. Weight with the stock wheels (already tubeless) including pedals was 15,16 kg; weight after the change is now a little over 14 kg. A reduce in weight of over 1 kg only with the wheels. Which makes clear how heavy the stock wheels really are. Kept the XR4s on them, they slipped very easy on the carbon rims and I´ve had absolutely no problems with leak or pumping them up with a normal air pump. 
After a few rides now with the new wheels I honestly have to say: the benefit of the much lighter wheels for sure is there and noticeable, but not like I expected it to be. In my opinion the reason for this is the rolling resistance of the XR4s, which I find is immense especially when it´s completely dry or on asphalt; they really glue on the ground. Now I´m thinking of a faster rolling tire (Bontrager XR 2 29 x 3.0) at least on the rear wheel for sunny and dry conditions.
Having had now many hours on the Full Stache I have to say that I´m really, really happy with the bike! Ok, when the trail is going up everything is a little bit slower and leisurely and I had to adjust my riding style accordingly. Lower gears, higher cadence, but as a result also a more economic riding style ;-). But when it goes down this beast puts such a big smile on my face... it´s unbelievable how capable this bike is in the downhills! 
Some people might think this bike could be overkill for them... I´m sure: after your first downhill with the Full Stache you will not longer think about any overkill


----------



## russmu66 (Nov 11, 2007)

Geniusbiker said:


> After a few rides now with the new wheels I honestly have to say: the benefit of the much lighter wheels for sure is there and noticeable, but not like I expected it to be. In my opinion the reason for this is the rolling resistance of the XR4s, which I find is immense especially when it´s completely dry or on asphalt; they really glue on the ground. Now I´m thinking of a faster rolling tire (Bontrager XR 2 29 x 3.0) at least on the rear wheel for sunny and dry conditions.


I'm one step ahead of you . I have my Full Stache, with Bontrager Line Pro 40 (carbon) wheels. Front is shod with the XR4, rear with the XR2.

Have had no issues with rolling speed... glides along very well. Sketchy fast loose-on-hard pack decents have been OK, if you don't mind a bit of rear wheel sliding antics. A few times on yesterday's ride I would have screamed with panic...if I wasn't grinning and laughing so much. If I was going to attack similar conditions in a race situation, I'd definitely be putting the XR4 back on the rear.

I also reduced my stem to a 40 mm one and am running 785 mm bars.

Cheers 
Muz


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

russmu66 said:


> ...if I wasn't grinning and laughing so much.


I know exactly what you mean!


----------



## cwtch (Apr 26, 2018)

dynomatt said:


> In the collective experience of the brains trust, what's the likelihood of a carbon frame and when? Have Trek got precedent for launching an alloy frame and then offering a carbon? If so, how long or how many units would they have to sell of the alloy FS8?


Working at a Trek shop and judging by past experience my guess is (assuming the alloy sales well), most likely next year at the soonest and possibly not until 2020. That would follow other models that came out as an alloy only then had a carbon to follow.


----------



## dynomatt (Jan 27, 2009)

Geniusbiker said:


> Last week I was able to mount my new just over 1600 gr wheelset on the Full Stache. Weight with the stock wheels (already tubeless) including pedals was 15,16 kg; weight after the change is now a little over 14 kg. A reduce in weight of over 1 kg only with the wheels. Which makes clear how heavy the stock wheels really are. Kept the XR4s on them, they slipped very easy on the carbon rims and I´ve had absolutely no problems with leak or pumping them up with a normal air pump.
> After a few rides now with the new wheels I honestly have to say: the benefit of the much lighter wheels for sure is there and noticeable, but not like I expected it to be. In my opinion the reason for this is the rolling resistance of the XR4s, which I find is immense especially when it´s completely dry or on asphalt; they really glue on the ground. Now I´m thinking of a faster rolling tire (Bontrager XR 2 29 x 3.0) at least on the rear wheel for sunny and dry conditions.
> Having had now many hours on the Full Stache I have to say that I´m really, really happy with the bike! Ok, when the trail is going up everything is a little bit slower and leisurely and I had to adjust my riding style accordingly. Lower gears, higher cadence, but as a result also a more economic riding style ;-). But when it goes down this beast puts such a big smile on my face... it´s unbelievable how capable this bike is in the downhills!
> Some people might think this bike could be overkill for them... I´m sure: after your first downhill with the Full Stache you will not longer think about any overkill


Hi what wheels did you get?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I’m rolling a McFly 2.8 up front and a Rekon 2.6 out back, nice combo.

I’ve done some long rides and big climbs on the Full Stache, not a bad all around bike.


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

dynomatt said:


> Hi what wheels did you get?


Hubs: Carbon-Ti X-Hub SL Boost
Rims: Duke 29+ Carbon
Spokes: Sapim CX-Ray
Nipples: Sapim Polyax Alu

At the back wheel since today a Bontrager XR2 29 x 3.0 - what a difference in rolling resistance and also weight!


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

chelboed said:


> According to Bikemag, the Full Stache is 33.4#.
> 
> Save 0.8# going tubeless.
> 
> ...


@chelboed I have upgradet my Full Stache 19.5" now as follows:
- tubeless
- 1605 gr wheelset
- Bontrager XR2 on the back wheel
- Shimano XT brakes (203/180 mm)
- Truvativ Descendant carbon riser
- Truvativ Descendant stem
- X01-Eagle cassette
- XX1-Eagle DUB crank
- superlight HT ME03T pedals
The weight is now 13,8 kg - how to you think should it be possible to reach a weight in the 28 lbs region?


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Geniusbiker said:


> @chelboed I have upgradet my Full Stache 19.5" now as follows:
> - tubeless
> - 1605 gr wheelset
> - Bontrager XR2 on the back wheel
> ...


Wow... Harder than I thought. You may have to break out the drill and start "tuning" some parts, remove load bearing decals, and go single speed.

Or maybe a rigid fork. ??

Ever watched Horns High mountain biking on YouTube? He ran a single brake (rear) on his Bronson for a long time. I've actually considered it at times, hehehe. Lose the dropper and front brake, you'll get there. ?

One thing I do know...your full Stache dropped 3# and likely destroys the chunk! Congrats!

I know all the trendy cool kids would burn you at the stake for it, but you could lose 3/4# by moving to a Thomson Elite post. In a world where everyone "needs" a dropper, you'd be surprised the difference between "need" & "want". I wouldn't take the Full Stache off any drops over 3-feet. I would be fine dropping 3-feet with a rigid post. I can carve fast enough downhill with my saddle at ride height as well because I've been riding since before droppers existed. Wouldn't mind having one, but I don't necessarily miss it either.

If it were a Slash, is say it's a no brainier. But it's a Full Stache, not a Freeride bike. I personally just wouldn't need a dropper on a trail bike. That's all the Full Stache is...a trail bike with big meats. Not an Enduro.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Ummm, nothing over 3', really? Sounds like you're in the market for a gravel burner 

Seriously, you've never had a Dropper?

If you gotta ask why...

So I'm really digging the Full Stache, riding hard and fast, not really hitting the limits, super fun as you'd expect. Great bike for all mountain use, doesn't feel heavy, just feels solid.

I'm still running 2.6/2.8 tires, works well for firm soil and rocky conditions, probably won't run 3" until winter.



chelboed said:


> Wow... Harder than I thought. You may have to break out the drill and start "tuning" some parts, remove load bearing decals, and go single speed.
> 
> Or maybe a rigid fork. 
> 
> ...


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

When did I say I never had a dropper? I've had a dropper. I liked it, just not a necessity. I was on the 1st Gen dropper bandwagon...but unless I'm freeriding/Enduro...I just really don't need it and would rather ditch the extra boat anchor.

I'm 220#. 3' is plenty high when they don't build trannies on drops. Most drops here are drops to flat. I'm not going to drop to flat over 3' on a trail bike with 29" hoops at 220#.

As I said...if it were a Slash, no prob.

And I'm not Nurse Ben. My skills have limits. I'm only a mortal...not a comic book hero like you, good sir! 😂😂😂


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

I will be joining the Full Stache fan club a little ahead of my plans due to having cracked my Stache 9.6 frame. A damn shame as I loved that bike but I do have a modded Stache 7 sitting in the garage. 
The 9.6 frame weighs 3.8lbs and the Full Stache frame set weighs 7.8lbs. My 9.6 weighed in at 24.2 lbs with a carbon seat post so I should be close to that 28lbs mark until I add the dropper. 
I have a dropper on the Stache 7 as I take it out west because I don't have the skills to not bash a carbon bike on the rocks occasionally. It weighs 27lbs with Minions and I9 BC 360 wheels on it.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Nice warranty choice, my friend! Can't wait to see the build.


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Believe me: I was riding on a Slash 29er nearly the whole last year. The Full Stache is as capable as the Slash when it goes downhill. The Full Stache isn´t just a trail bike. This thing is a beast! I would never do riding it without a dropper post only for weight savings!


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

chelboed said:


> I personally just wouldn't need a dropper on a trail bike.


That's very arguable statement. I can agree that you don't really need a dropper on XC bike but not trail bike. A dropper is a big improvement for any trail bike, especially when you often switch between deeper, low hinge position on downhills and seated position for longer climbs. Also, dropper is very welcome when you're not that young and don't have infinite endurance to climb standing every time or your knees don't like pedaling with low saddle.

Riding with high saddle your range of movement is more limited - you can't get deep enough behind your saddle on steep sections, also when cornering, jumping/bunnyhoping is harder etc.

The weight and the cost of the dropper are absolutely worthwhile.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

Mebaru said:


> That's very arguable statement. I can agree that you don't really need a dropper on XC bike but not trail bike. A dropper is a big improvement for any trail bike, especially when you often switch between deeper, low hinge position on downhills and seated position for longer climbs. Also, dropper is very welcome when you're not that young and don't have infinite endurance to climb standing every time or your knees don't like pedaling with low saddle.
> 
> Riding with high saddle your range of movement is more limited - you can't get deep enough behind your saddle on steep sections, also when cornering, jumping/bunnyhoping is harder etc.
> 
> The weight and the cost of the dropper are absolutely worthwhile.


I joined the dropper revolution on my Stache but as time went on I ditched it in favor of my old trusted Thudbuster. For me the thudbuster works 100 percent of the time for when I am seated whereas the dropper was only used a small fraction of the time. I have a few friends who are much more enduro bro than me and one of them ditched their dropper too. 
Dropper or not I tend to avoid riding drops where I think there is a chance of an endo.
Not against them but for many of us it ain't the be all end all that many think it is.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

richwolf said:


> I joined the dropper revolution on my Stache but as time went on I ditched it in favor of my old trusted Thudbuster. For me the thudbuster works 100 percent of the time for when I am seated whereas the dropper was only used a small fraction of the time. I have a few friends who are much more enduro bro than me and one of them ditched their dropper too.
> Dropper or not I tend to avoid riding drops where I think there is a chance of an endo.
> Not against them but for many of us it ain't the be all end all that many think it is.


I don't really see any benefits ditching the dropper if you serious about trail riding. I used to ride without dropper for a decade but when I got one for myself I have learned why it is considered a must-have component for any serious mountain-biking. Dropper gives you better positioning and more safety. Even if you're newbie or a very cautious rider, you still will benefit when lowering your saddle a few centimeters down.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Mebaru said:


> That's very arguable statement. I can agree that you don't really need a dropper on XC bike but not trail bike.


It's not arguable at all. I said "I" don't "need" a dropper on a trail bike. I didn't say "you" don't "want".



Mebaru said:


> A dropper is a big improvement for any trail bike...


Totally agree...but it doesn't mean I "need" it for my own trail network. You might, but I don't.



Mebaru said:


> Riding with high saddle your range of movement is more limited - you can't get deep enough behind your saddle on steep sections, also when cornering, jumping/bunnyhoping is harder etc.
> 
> The weight and the cost of the dropper are absolutely worthwhile.


I can get plenty deep enough behind my saddle. I can bunny hop whatever I need too. It's harder at times, but we all know only serious mountain bikers use droppers.

If you're competing, getting paid, or just have a giant ego to satisfy, yup you probably need it. I'm just not at the point anymore. I don't approach mountain bikes like it's what life is about. I can drop, jump, shred easier with a dropper. I can drop what I want, shred what I want, and jump what I want without one as well. And I'm not paying the marketing machine $400 to do it.

There are only 2x 31.6 mm droppers out there that have an offset clamp. 9point8 and Specialized ircc. The KS Lev is not a serious dropper IMO. It's a beginners basic boat anchor.

The 9point8 and ircc are both about 4 bills. Asinine. Like spending a grand on a fork. Asinine. This sport has been allowed to get out of hand by people willing to pay these prices.

So hey... I'm saving $400 and 3/4 of a pound.

You don't know what I need. I know what I need on a trail bike.

Before droppers, we still had trail bikes. Heck man we invented huck-to-flat. We appreciate them when we have them, but "need" is for people who've grown up in the now generation and haven't ever enjoyed mountain biking on all kinds of equipment.



Mebaru said:


> I don't really see any benefits ditching the dropper if you serious about trail riding. I used to ride without dropper for a decade but when I got one for myself I have learned why it is considered a must-have component for any serious mountain-biking. Dropper gives you better positioning and more safety. Even if you're newbie or a very cautious rider, you still will benefit when lowering your saddle a few centimeters down.


Soooo serious... Lol.

Don't get me wrong, I like droppers. But as stated above, I'm not using a hunk of crap like a KS Lev...and if your focus is to save weight like the conversation began, it's a great place to start.

This is a dumbaz conversation anyways. We all know droppers help you do certain things. So do suspension forks, yet people still run rigid. So do clipless pedals, yet people still ride flats. Holy crap, the advancements in rear suspension, yet so many ride hardtails.

"Need" is the single most over used word in mountain biking.

Move on.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

Mebaru said:


> I don't really see any benefits ditching the dropper if you serious about trail riding. I used to ride without dropper for a decade but when I got one for myself I have learned why it is considered a must-have component for any serious mountain-biking. Dropper gives you better positioning and more safety. Even if you're newbie or a very cautious rider, you still will benefit when lowering your saddle a few centimeters down.


I am serious and have been on a mountain bike since 1987. Thousands of miles every year. 
I tried a dropper thought it was the way to go but switched back.
Hey if you need one great, I don't. Must have for you but not for me or many others I suspect.
I have some "must have" requirements for my bikes but it doesn't upset me when others don't follow suit.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

chelboed said:


> Soooo serious... Lol.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I like droppers. But as stated above, I'm not using a hunk of crap like a KS Lev...and if your focus is to save weight like the conversation began, it's a great place to start.
> ...
> "Need" is the single most over used word in mountain biking.


Your original complaint was about Full Stache weight. But we all know that bike weight is largely overrated. Thus saving 300g on dropper won't help you ride anyhow better or with more fun. Why one should trade 300g for worst positioning, less control and safety especially when a dropper is already installed on a bike?

First you're complaining that stock Full Stache is very heavy, with boat anchor wheels and want it below 29 lbs, while it was clearing obvious that it will cost several grands to get the bike to this weight and it also obvious that it won't give you any significant advantage over original bike unless you're a "serious mountain biker". Now you're writing about over used need of expensive components and you don't want to pay for a mere dropper (that can improve your riding) because it isn't a mandatory component and is somewhat expensive...



chelboed said:


> we all know only serious mountain bikers use droppers.


Indeed. Same for full suspension, long travels, wide handlebars, short stems etc. Only serious mountain bikers should use them.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

I don't recall complaining about any of that. I don't even own one.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

chelboed said:


> I think the suspension is good and the drivetrain is pretty adequate. I'm pretty sure I'd change the brakes, wheelset, tires, saddle, bars, and stem.
> 
> A cockpit is a very personal fit...especially as long as I've been in the cockpit. Tires are too heavy and a little overkill for my region. Brakes? I like XT...I'm smitten. Wheelset is heavy and I can't stand straight g spokes and generic hubs. Seatpost is a wash. I'm sure it functions adequately, but I'd love to boutique it out with a KS carbon to save weight, or a Bike Yoke just for reliability's sake...but as I said, the house brand crap is likely adequate.
> 
> You could build this bike under 28#


Ok, maybe it wasn't a direct complaint. But you mentioned you want to change like almost everything besides a frame to build this bike under 28lbs. How this lines up with over used "need" for expensive components?

Also, KS or BikeYoke droppers were absolutely ok for you before and now you're talking that anything other than 9point8 dropper is a crap for beginners. Dude, you aren't following your own rules.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

(Cliffs notes: you're beating a dead horse. Droppers are better, I just don't "need" one on a trail bike. Move on for the love of everything holy...and ruining this thread.)

Long winded reply:

Nope. KS Lev is a boat anchor. KS carbon is not offset/setback. Neither is the Bike Yoke. I'm talking about my Stache hardtail. If I built the Full Stache, I'd build an XL instead of the large. Then I would use a non offset post. If I were getting a dropper for my current hardtail, it's only the ircc or 9point8.

So my comments regarding KS Lev being a boat anchor still stands. Obviously the carbon isn't the boat anchor.

And yes, if I were to build the Full Stache, I'd likely have to do a frame up because I don't like house brand componentry for the most part. Since listing that theoretical build...I've actually assessed my local trail networks and come to the conclusion that there are only a few instances where I'd adjust my saddle height. For that reason, I've stopped worrying about the dropper and focused on a nice standard setback post. I'm getting another Thomson Elite like on my other bike. Do I need a Thomson? Nope. I would say that I "need" a seatpost so I can sit down once in a while. Will a Thomson work better than my stock Bongrager Comp? It will make less noise at the clamp, but functionally...it will fill 2x voids: It will drop a quarter pound of dead weight, and it will give my wife and kids something to wrap for me for my birthday. No I don't "need" a Thomson on a trail bike. My Bontrager would theoretically function just fine. Now that we've got that straight...

Obviously I haven't built a Full Stache as the one I dreamed up... I'm not even willing to spend $400 on a dropper for my hardtail, I'm obviously not building a whole new bike at the moment.

If one day I do, yes it'll likely be frame-up so I could build it how I want. (Not necessarily need) And I wouldn't be as concerned about actually hitting 28# as some...but I still think I could do it without an act of God. I still need to demo this tank to see if it's even worth my time. Demo Day got rained out this morning. I'm still thinking a lighter weight Fuel EX may serve me better around here.

Either way, the theoretical build you quoted is one of thousands I've daydreamed about.

The whole conundrum seemed to be revolving around "needing" a dropper. I'm just saying a trail bike didn't need one. It will work better for many things over a standard post, but I don't need one. And if Mr 28# goal doesn't necessarily need one, then he's 3/4# closer to his goal. If his goal is to drop 5 pounds off the portly stock Full Stache 8...then that's his goal. I know I'd notice that weight loss on my trails and appreciate it more than a dropper. That said...sometimes you have to drop many things that others say you "need" like heavier tires. How many people hate the Chupa and say you "need" a DHF or XR4 in a 29x3? I've read it many times, but if you want to hit your goal of droppng 5lbs to make the bike pedal w/o a coronary...then you have to lose the pig meats and dead weight of the dropper. That's daggum near 2lbs right there. If that's not your goal, fine. Don't shove your goal down someone else's throat.

I have hand built wheels with Hope hubs because I want them and I appreciate what they bring to my ride. I don't need them. I can't say the same for a dropper on a trail bike.

You're never going to convince me of my own needs. You don't know me, my trails, my riding goals... Stop trying to convince me that I need something that the market has shoved down your throat. It works for you, great. It works well for my Freeride Enduro trails around here... Yes, no doubt. A trail bike? I don't need it.

I don't think anyone "needs" it. "Want" is a different story altogether.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Ummm, yeah, Full Stache, great bike, stock suspension works well, stock dropper is fine, upgrading the wheels is not s bad choice if you abuse hubs. Honestly, if the Full Stache came in carbon, was a tad stiffer, and dropped a couple pounds, it’d be a quiver killer. 

I spent all day digging with a backhoe, two more trees to plant and I get my hall pass.

Can’t wait till we get a little more snow melt... it’s gonna be a long riding season in the Sierras.


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> Ummm, yeah, Full Stache, great bike, stock suspension works well, stock dropper is fine, upgrading the wheels is not s bad choice if you abuse hubs. Honestly, if the Full Stache came in carbon, was a tad stiffer, and dropped a couple pounds, it'd be a quiver killer.
> 
> I spent all day digging with a backhoe, two more trees to plant and I get my hall pass.
> 
> Can't wait till we get a little more snow melt... it's gonna be a long riding season in the Sierras.


Carbon or some I9 BC 360 wheels seems to relieve most of the "stiffness" complaints. I was waiting for the carbon version to come out but breaking my HT frame moved things up. When they do bring out the carbon version, I will weigh the option unless I fancy something else.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Stiffer wheels will not change flex any more than any other bike; I have very stiff custom wheels now. Chain rub with 3" tires on largest cog when cranking hard. It's not a problem, but it's annoying.

What surprised me most was how the suspension feels and performs, I'm not much of Trek guy; only one Trek in the family years ago, but it seems they did their homework.

So for the folks that have a Full Stache and a Stache: how are they the same, different?



ethierjung said:


> Carbon or some I9 BC 360 wheels seems to relieve most of the "stiffness" complaints. I was waiting for the carbon version to come out but breaking my HT frame moved things up. When they do bring out the carbon version, I will weigh the option unless I fancy something else.


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

I will definitely find out the difference between the Stache and Full Stache as I will be moving everything from my 9.6 over to the Full. 
Regarding the frame stiffness, I'm just going by what I have seen regarding wheel upgrade helping with the feel. Check out this review at 2:55 mark. 







Nurse Ben said:


> Stiffer wheels will not change flex any more than any other bike; I have very stiff custom wheels now. Chain rub with 3" tires on largest cog when cranking hard. It's not a problem, but it's annoying.
> 
> What surprised me most was how the suspension feels and performs, I'm not much of Trek guy; only one Trek in the family years ago, but it seems they did their homework.
> 
> So for the folks that have a Full Stache and a Stache: how are they the same, different?


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

ethierjung said:


> I will definitely find out the difference between the Stache and Full Stache as I will be moving everything from my 9.6 over to the Full.
> Regarding the frame stiffness, I'm just going by what I have seen regarding wheel upgrade helping with the feel. Check out this review at 2:55 mark.


I can't wait for this review! Take your time. Do it up right. This will be very helpful.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Regarding the flex comments that have been floating around since it was released... Terminology is key here. The "bike" flexes with the factory build. Part of the flex is in the frame, part in the wheelset. High end carbon wheels helped but didn't totally cure all of the "bike" flex because some of it is in the rear triangle. If you can handle what's left, shouldn't be terrible...except your average mountain biker is a little guy. 200# + Clyde's like me could quite possibly have a great deal more to say about it.

Like when the Avid warble epidemic hit the scene. It was 10x worse for big dudes because of all the frame, disc adapter, and rotor flex.

They should always have a Clyde review bikes. 😀


----------



## Osco (Apr 4, 2013)

alexdi said:


> Yeah, that's enough. About two people have ridden the thing. I thought some folks might appreciate some notes about suspension, weight, and size, but I guess not. I just pulled the post to save y'all the trouble of complaining.


Hahahaha, the complainers,
They desperately want one, the gotta have it now peeps.
but they know If they buy another bike the wife will glue their testicles to their thighs


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

chelboed said:


> Regarding the flex comments that have been floating around since it was released... Terminology is key here. The "bike" flexes with the factory build. Part of the flex is in the frame, part in the wheelset. High end carbon wheels helped but didn't totally cure all of the "bike" flex because some of it is in the rear triangle. If you can handle what's left, shouldn't be terrible...except your average mountain biker is a little guy. 200# + Clyde's like me could quite possibly have a great deal more to say about it.
> 
> Like when the Avid warble epidemic hit the scene. It was 10x worse for big dudes because of all the frame, disc adapter, and rotor flex.
> 
> They should always have a Clyde review bikes. 


We'll see, I'm 6'2" and 195-215lbs depending on the time of year. Last year just before Turkey Day I was down to 185 but I had almost no fat. Didn't feel right at that weight.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I'm 200# plus kit.



chelboed said:


> Regarding the flex comments that have been floating around since it was released... Terminology is key here. The "bike" flexes with the factory build. Part of the flex is in the frame, part in the wheelset. High end carbon wheels helped but didn't totally cure all of the "bike" flex because some of it is in the rear triangle. If you can handle what's left, shouldn't be terrible...except your average mountain biker is a little guy. 200# + Clyde's like me could quite possibly have a great deal more to say about it.
> 
> Like when the Avid warble epidemic hit the scene. It was 10x worse for big dudes because of all the frame, disc adapter, and rotor flex.
> 
> They should always have a Clyde review bikes. ?


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

265 here. I'll give an XL a workout.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Osco said:


> Hahahaha, the complainers,
> They desperately want one, the gotta have it now peeps.
> but they know If they buy another bike the wife will glue their testicles to their thighs


Sounds like you know me personally.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

ethierjung said:


> We'll see, I'm 6'2" and 195-215lbs depending on the time of year. Last year just before Turkey Day I was down to 185 but I had almost no fat. Didn't feel right at that weight.


At your height, that's a hard weight to maintain. When I was racing in my 20's, I was 6'1.5 and 183. Holy crap, I had to work so hard to stay there. It wasn't fun. Now I'm early 40's and flux betw 195-215 like you. I'm much happier now. I enjoy the ride more instead of see it as a job that I have to do X-amount of climbs each day, or go to the hospital and climb 20 flights of stairs 5-6 times a day with my kid on my shoulders.

Now, I eat smart but happy...ride as far as I feel like riding...climb what I want...enjoy the ride for the sake of the ride.

I actually hate exercise. Exercise is a byproduct of the fun I'm having. I love to go downhill fast. I love to do little drops and jumps. I have to climb the hill though, before I can go down it...so I get exercise because it happens with what I love to do.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Nurse Ben said:


> I'm 200# plus kit.


Your opinion is becoming more and more valid, hehehe.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

Reading this thread is like watching a toddler learn to walk- it keeps looking like it's going to fall flat on it's face and you start to wince and look away, but it's little arms spin and remarkably, it keeps standing.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Agreed. So I'll try to keep adding data points.

Rode ~15 miles yesterday on a new single track that climbs steeply toward Spooner Summit off the Clear Creek Trail. Trail is very tight, reminds me of the old goat path trails in East TN. Grade was ~8%, lots of rocks and roots.

Though the Full Stache is long, it was a hoot to whip through the woods on the way down.

I know folks harp on weight, but the Full Stache doesn't ride heavy, at least not any heavier than my other FS bikes of late.

It certainly is a fast bike, like fast enough to get me in some serious trouble!

As far as the kind of riding I enjoy, I like to climb, as in all day, miles and miles, the more technical the better, then I like to descend, fast, ugly stuff, drops, loose, wildness, whatever I can find. There's really nothing I dislike other than flow. I really dislike flow.



MrIcky said:


> Reading this thread is like watching a toddler learn to walk- it keeps looking like it's going to fall flat on it's face and you start to wince and look away, but it's little arms spin and remarkably, it keeps standing.


----------



## risslerp (Aug 11, 2006)

Just received my Full Stache a few days ago. Bought a med Frame and had the LBS build it up. Only had a couple of rides on it and still fiddling with set up. Sram GX Eagle Dub, Bontrager Line Pro 40, Rockshox Pike RCT3 at 140mm, RockShox Reverb Seatpost. What you see here is 35 lbs.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

risslerp said:


> Just received my Full Stache a few days ago. Bought a med Frame and had the LBS build it up. Only had a couple of rides on it and still fiddling with set up. Sram GX Eagle Dub, Bontrager Line Pro 40, Rockshox Pike RCT3 at 140mm, RockShox Reverb Seatpost. What you see here is 35 lbs.
> 
> View attachment 1199501


Nice!! 35 is a bit "ouch", but looks like fun!


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Brother Speeders...


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Nurse Ben said:


> Why you ask? Well, for my daily driver I prefer 29 x 2.6-2.8 tires and a little more travel, so I have a GG Smash on order.


For 29er tires the Smash will only fit 2.5" tires without rubbing. You can probably get a 2.6" tire to work as long as you are up for a compromise of some sort - rubbing seat tube, limiting your tire choice to undersized options or reducing the rear travel. You will not get a 29 x 2.8" tire into that frame.

Given the size of 29er tire you like to run the Smash doesn't seem to be a good fit.


----------



## pOrk (Jan 16, 2015)

Nurse Ben said:


> Just a heads up: At some point this summer I will be selling my Full Stache, either as a complete or as a frame set. I may consider trading for a carbon Stache frame plus cash.
> 
> It'll probably end June or so.
> 
> ...


I like GG and really like the smash and trail pistol, but 10mm travel and limited tire selection compared to the FS. Are you going 150mm on the GG? Seems like the TFS checks all the boxes.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Let's Rehearse...


----------



## pOrk (Jan 16, 2015)

Nurse Ben said:


> Thank you for your input on my choice of bikes. Don't mind me if I completely disregard your opinions


Thanks for taking the time to not only say it but do it. Probably need a stumpjumper if you want reasonable tire clearance and a 140/150 horst link. Chainstays might be a bit off for you.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

So, here's what I'm getting out of this:

NB: yay I got a full stache...it's the best ever!!! I'll fight anyone who questions it And it never ever flexes.... And I'm going to change every single thing about it starting with smaller tires

Everyone: hey- you may have bought the wrong bike, no need to defend it's honor bro 

NB: you're all stupid and you don't know what I need and the short chainstays because I climb tech yo' and 433mm is for chumps bro. Chainstay doesn't flex still- magazine dudes are dumb.

MikeC: Here are some reviews, I've had more time on this-great bike, rear end flexes.

NB: Great review, couldn't agree more. Still changing everything!

Everyone: um, ok. so it does flex? /shrug. your money.

NB: It's for sale, buying a new bike and going to put these 2.6 tires on it.

Vikb: tires won't fit new bike. pOrk: seems like the stache is still checking off every box?

NB: I'm ignoring all of you, you don't know me! /winkyemote.

ME: Um...good luck with that? I'm sure the GG Smash thread will enjoy your crazy antics as much as I have.


----------



## Libikerdad (Nov 18, 2017)

^^^ perfectly summarized the thread


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

All Together...


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Good Morning Nurse!


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Burma-shave


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

MRP Stage Coil 150 up front, CC DB Coil out back.

Rekon 2.6 out back and the Terrene McFly 2.8 up front, works well for most of my riding.

I've got 29 x 3 on my Wozo, though I will probably sell the Wozo to get a carbon Stache for riding mellow stuff, gravel burning, and some touring.

If the Full Stache was lighter and stiffer, I'd agree that it checks all the boxes. It's a nice bike for sure, still really enjoy riding it, but it's just not quite right enough to keep.

I'm a two bike guy, just can't see the point of having two FS bikes.



pOrk said:


> I like GG and really like the smash and trail pistol, but 10mm travel and limited tire selection compared to the FS. Are you going 150mm on the GG? Seems like the TFS checks all the boxes.


----------



## pOrk (Jan 16, 2015)

Nurse Ben said:


> MRP Stage Coil 150 up front, CC DB Coil out back.
> 
> Rekon 2.6 out back and the Terrene McFly 2.8 up front, works well for most of my riding.
> 
> ...


It looks, LOOKS, like the mcfly rolls even faster than a rekon. What about mcfly fromt and rear. Im trying to pick a fast rolling 2.6 combo, but want reasonable front end bite(not minion level).

GG likes that MRP. Good luck with the smash.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

NB,

You go through bikes like I go through underwear! Once a month!

I think there should be an unwritten rule that you can't give a review of a bike until you have it in your possession and have ridden it a minimum of a month.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

MrIcky said:


> So, here's what I'm getting out of this:
> 
> NB: yay I got a full stache...it's the best ever!!! I'll fight anyone who questions it And it never ever flexes.... And I'm going to change every single thing about it starting with smaller tires
> 
> ...


The bike industry needs guys like him.

Buying a Stache would be a waste as well, because there's so much overlap with a 140mm bike, but hey....


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

richde said:


> The bike industry needs guys like him.
> 
> Buying a Stache would be a waste as well, because there's so much overlap with a 140mm bike, but hey....


I actually think that if he bought a Stache Hardtail there would be a chance that it would stay in his quiver the longest. I have two and in my opinion they were one of Trek's greatest bikes ever. Not that Trek ever set the bar that high! wink


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I really like the McFly, it's a fast roller and once you lay it over it's a great carver, but you gotta stay on top of the tire and really lay it over otherwise it'll wash; not a vary good transitional zone.

I like the Rekon out back as an all around tire, had a Rekon up front before the McFly and felt it was washing out before the back so I swapped the McFly 2.8.

It's a close call to say that the McFly rolls faster than the Rekon, but in terms of weight and casing, the 60tpi Rekon is lighter than the Tough McFly, and in my mind they are about equal in toughness, but the Rekon has a bit more traction and is more supple.

I got a Chunk Tough 2.6 that is mounted on a front wheel looking forlorn cuz it's not gotten any trail time. It's such a brick, more like a Minion, nice looking tread but kinda skinny, so who knows.



pOrk said:


> It looks, LOOKS, like the mcfly rolls even faster than a rekon. What about mcfly fromt and rear. Im trying to pick a fast rolling 2.6 combo, but want reasonable front end bite(not minion level).
> 
> GG likes that MRP. Good luck with the smash.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

richwolf said:


> I actually think that if he bought a Stache Hardtail there would be a chance that it would stay in his quiver the longest. I have two and in my opinion they were one of Trek's greatest bikes ever. Not that Trek ever set the bar that high! wink


I love that I got a Stache, (9 then 9.8) but hate how it relegated my Mach 6 to use only on the absolute gnarliest trails. I race endurance and enduro on it and it's shocking how versatile they are. I know I'm giving up (a little) something in an endurance race, but the way it rolls makes it a no-brainer on a mild enduro course.

People look at it, look at what can be done on it, and then buy something else.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

richde said:


> Buying a Stache *would be a waste* as well, because there's so much overlap with a 140mm bike, but hey....


Just depends if you goal is to own/ride a bike or if your goal is to buy/sell bikes. We've got both types on MTBR. 

The bike industry does really like the folks who chase the second goal. :thumbsup:


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

It's a curious practice when people judge others to justify their own choices and beliefs.



vikb said:


> Just depends if you goal is to own/ride a bike or if your goal is to buy/sell bikes. We've got both types on MTBR.
> 
> The bike industry does really like the folks who chase the second goal. :thumbsup:


----------



## prj71 (Dec 29, 2014)

Is this bike breaking the Internet yet?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

It's not a bike, it's a living, breathing, reinterpretation of mana.



prj71 said:


> Is this bike breaking the Internet yet?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

I wonder if the Stache Fully will sell in large numbers?

I certainly don't think it's going to have the impact or sales that the Stache hardtail has had.

The extra weight, complexity and feel of the fully might make it into quite a different bike. (not that I have ridden a Stache fully)

BTW didn't one poster say at one time that they wouldn't put a beginner on a 29er bike much less a 29 plus because it took too much arm strength and skill to ride one yet later on said they wouldn't hesitate to put a beginner on one???


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Yes, there was a guy who said that on another thread, he got bashed pretty hard, he's not a regular poster.

The Full Stache, like any other production bike, will sell based on how it looks and feels in a parking lot test, as well as price point. Sorry, but that's the truth.

It's for these reasons ^ that a carbon fiber version will likely not be forthcoming.

The way the Full Stache sits now, it's not a terrible bike by any stretch, but you gotta put up with a couple issues, perhaps that's common for all bikes.

I'll keep riding mine three to four times a week until my new build is complete, likely late June to early July. Ten miles and 3k climbing last night, in between thunder storms.



richwolf said:


> I wonder if the Stache Fully will sell in large numbers?
> 
> I certainly don't think it's going to have the impact or sales that the Stache hardtail has had.
> 
> ...


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

richwolf said:


> I wonder if the Stache Fully will sell in large numbers?
> 
> I certainly don't think it's going to have the impact or sales that the Stache hardtail has had.
> 
> ...


IS the Stache a big seller? As a Stache owner, I had zero interest because it isn't comparable to a Stache any more than a Krampus is.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

Nurse Ben said:


> It's a curious practice when people judge others to justify their own choices and beliefs.


Not as curious as posting in a forum and being surprised that people comment on it.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

richde said:


> IS the Stache a big seller? As a Stache owner, I had zero interest because it isn't comparable to a Stache any more than a Krampus is.


I don't know if the Full Stache is a BIG seller, because I don't know how big the initial allotment was. However they did sell out the initial allotment really fast, or so I understand it. I'd guess that the speed that they sold that initial allotment will definitely keep it in the lineup and probably gain it a CF model. My thought is that as soon as they saw how fast the first batch went, they automatically started drawing up phase 2. I know the regular stache is a solid seller, not as much as a Fuel, but strong consistent sales.

The full stache is more expensive than a fuel ex 8, and about the same as a 9.7. I think that's going to be hard to explain to a casual buyer so it may be hard to keep that demand going.

I'm looking forward to these being available in sufficient numbers that I can go rent one and take it some place appropriate for testing.


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

I have owned a lot of bikes; bought them... and sold them never looking back.
The Full Stache is the bike that aroused the most emotions I´ve ever had with a mountain bike. From the first pictures I saw until I was able to put my legs over it.
I really love this bike and I wouldn´t be surprised if it would be the bike I will keep for a very, very long time. I like the idea that it´s not a big seller, that many people don´t like the looks of it; that makes it very exclusive!


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

Forewarning, this is a rambly one.

Since I just bought one of these bikes, I'll chime in my justification for doing such a thing, since everyone seems to be unsure of who is buying these bikes

I'm not an expert rider. I ride, not terribly fast or hard, but the wheels move and the suspension works. I ride all types of trails, some are a little flowy, some are just miles long rock gardens, and there are a few dh parks that I ride. I need a bike to ride them all. I have no aspirations of racing or being the fastest rider on Strava or whatever, I like to ride to push my own limits and have fun.

I like to work on my own bikes(because a solid 90% of bicycle mechanics are c*nts, no offence to you few fellas that aren't), and I like to buy a bike to own it for years, not ride if for a season and sell it. The bike I'm coming off of is a Cdale Trail 29er, which is no Ferrari by any stretch, but I've been putting a few hundred miles a season on it since 2011. I've replaced some components along the way, but the guts have, and still serve me well. 

What drew me to this bike was - 
Burly aluminum frame - I need my bike to be able to take some hard hits and not shatter. I may not ride as hard as some, but every once in a while I crash hard. Also, I want it to last years. 

Mainstream manufacturer - I'm not a fanboy of any specific brand, but since I like to work on my own stuff, its nice to know I can probably find a dealer nearby who can help me get the right parts for my bike. I like the smaller brands, but I'm not knowledgeable enough about all the components and bike-wrenching to go a full custom route. There is safety in the big brands, in that regard. 

My parking lot ride was expectedly uneventful. But it was well balanced, I liked how the fat tires gave me a better sense of low speed stability, it felt much more solid than some other trail bikes I've ridden(which admittedly are not many), and it fit me comfortably. I've ridden other bikes that felt like my fat arse was going to break the poor donkey's back on every drop. 

I'm sure it'll take me some time to learn how to get it dialed in, I'll probably make some tweaks along the way, but Trek's advertising peaked my interest. At the end of the day, most other trail bikes are tailored toward maximizing some performance aspect or another, and at the end of the day, I just want a bike that's fun to ride in versatile conditions and reliable.


----------



## Libikerdad (Nov 18, 2017)

steelerector said:


> Forewarning, this is a rambly one.
> 
> Since I just bought one of these bikes, I'll chime in my justification for doing such a thing, since everyone seems to be unsure of who is buying these bikes
> 
> ...


Sounds like you made a well thought out purchase and picked a bike suited to your intended riding. I have a nicely upgraded 2017 stache 7 hardtail which I love, but when I was able to purchase a second bike to compliment it the full suspension stache seemed like it would be overkill for the trails I ride so I went the playful route and got an ibis mojo 3. We are lucky in the sense that there are so many good choices right now and such variety that we can all choose a bike that works for what and how we want to ride


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

Just got a new medium Full Stache.

Just wondering if anyone with short legs tried to squeeze a 150 mm dropper on theirs.

Trek doesn’t seem to have any info on their 125 mm dropper insertion depth, so I will have to pull mine off to see what it is and find out if it is worth trying.

I’m considering trying a new One Up, since the travel is adjustable...but they seem to be out of stock...

Also, I can feel some binding when pushing down on the stock Trek dropper, seems to work ok, but never felt this on my other droppers (Lev, reverb, Fall Line). I verified that the seat collar is not over torqued.

Thanks.


----------



## Osco (Apr 4, 2013)

Are there many other FS 29+ bikes ? 
Is the Trek bike better In some way ?
I thought they were the first until I looked a little.
https://www.singletracks.com/blog/m...t-ever-full-suspension-29-salsa-deadwood-sus/

Trek Is smart, they came out a year late with the Roscoe, let every thing shake out. That move let them get It right the first time.
I assume they did this with the FS Stache.

The Rocky Mountain sherpa, another 29+FS bike, didn't have Boost hub spacing, IMHO they blew it on that alone.

What did Trek do better ? what did you guys notice right off ?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Long, low, slack, 130mm travel, short chainstays with room for 29 x 3" tires. Only production bike that hits all the numbers.



Osco said:


> Are there many other FS 29+ bikes ?
> Is the Trek bike better In some way ?
> I thought they were the first until I looked a little.
> https://www.singletracks.com/blog/m...t-ever-full-suspension-29-salsa-deadwood-sus/
> ...


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

Wrong post.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Osco said:


> Are there many other FS 29+ bikes ?
> Is the Trek bike better In some way ?
> I thought they were the first until I looked a little.
> https://www.singletracks.com/blog/m...t-ever-full-suspension-29-salsa-deadwood-sus/
> ...


Funny how Shimano was flamed for coming out with 12spd late, but IMO...I think they were wise to do so. Test, review, test, get it right.

Probably the same with Trek. Looks like they got the Geo right, Boost, appropriate travel, etc... Wise decisions. Though, I wonder why people (or Trek) like such short forks. I love my Stache at 140mm. I think I'd prefer the fully at the same length of travel as well.


----------



## croatiansensation (Feb 21, 2005)

NYrr496 said:


> I just saw the article about the cougar on Singletracks.com. This is the first time I either saw the names of the people and realized it was a man and a woman or actually read the names...
> I HATE to sound sexist but it said the woman was the one who ran and got killed. I guess now I'm more understanding of how the whole thing went down. She probably thought the guy was as good as dead so what chance would she have. Maybe he was trying to put himself between her and the cat? No one knows but them.
> I have one riding buddy who I know as sure as I'm standing here, we would stand side by side and make sure we got each other's backs. I'm pretty sure if I were able to maintain my composure, I could keep my son and stepson calm and standing there with me. Running is almost always a bad idea.
> My wife would PROBABLY stay right with me but wouldn't be any help fighting anything off. I'm not sure. We've never been in a situation like that.
> I know someone is gonna flame me for this post. It isn't my intention to start a fight or say women are weak. It just made me look at the story a little differently. I would never run from a friend.


LOL, what?!?!?!?

Wrong thread, NYrr496.


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

croatiansensation said:


> LOL, what?!?!?!?
> 
> Wrong thread, NYrr496.


RIght?! I was properly confused lol


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

croatiansensation said:


> LOL, what?!?!?!?
> 
> Wrong thread, NYrr496.


I thought maybe girl who got attacked by the kitty was riding a Full Stache.


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

I apologize. I was certain this post was deleted from the other thread. I have no idea how I posted it over here.


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

Osco said:


> Are there many other FS 29+ bikes ?
> Is the Trek bike better In some way ?
> I thought they were the first until I looked a little.
> https://www.singletracks.com/blog/m...t-ever-full-suspension-29-salsa-deadwood-sus/
> ...


Lenz Behemoth. Costs a bit more. Reviews claim it's more playful.Full suspension plus bike | Lenz Sport Behemoth 29 plus and 27.5+


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Yes, Lenz makes one, as could a lot of custom frame builders.

I like Lenz, I rode a Fatillac for a bit, Devn's bikes are burly, geo is different than Trek, hard to find demos, but it's an alternative.

Like other, I'd love to see more full suspension 29+, but apparently there are not enough of us who care.

I'll add another benefit of the Full Stache: Price.



ethierjung said:


> Lenz Behemoth. Costs a bit more. Reviews claim it's more playful.Full suspension plus bike | Lenz Sport Behemoth 29 plus and 27.5+


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

ethierjung said:


> Lenz Behemoth. Costs a bit more. Reviews claim it's more playful.Full suspension plus bike | Lenz Sport Behemoth 29 plus and 27.5+


Reach is too short, like over two inches shorter than a Full Stache.

I don't know how long is too long, but 425mm for a large sized trail bike is not long enough.


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

richde said:


> Reach is too short, like over two inches shorter than a Full Stache.
> 
> I don't know how long is too long, but 425mm for a large sized trail bike is not long enough.


 I with you there, I have been getting by on large Stache's but I when I stand up to climb steep hills, I get too far over the bars and this is why I went with the XL Full Stache.


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

ethierjung said:


> I with you there, I have been getting by on large Stache's but I when I stand up to climb steep hills, I get too far over the bars and this is why I went with the XL Full Stache.


How tall are you?


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

NYrr496 said:


> How tall are you?


6'2" with a 36" inseam. My Scalpels and Superfly are all XL.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

richde said:


> Reach is too short, like over two inches shorter than a Full Stache.
> 
> I don't know how long is too long, but 425mm for a large sized trail bike is not long enough.


Your opinion is as valid as anyone else's here, but I have to wonder: Ever have anything positive to say -- about anything?

Your posts are becoming the proverbial wet blanket. And no, what this world needs is not more negativity.


----------



## russmu66 (Nov 11, 2007)

mikesee said:


> Your opinion is as valid as anyone else's here, but I have to wonder: Ever have anything positive to say -- about anything?
> 
> Your posts are becoming the proverbial wet blanket. And no, what this world needs is not more negativity.


I can't see any negativity in the post from richde. As long as they're accurate, those measurements do sound too short ...for me at least. We're all different shapes and sizes though.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Trek just warranteed my post, replacing the 125mm dropper that it came with for a 150mm dropper that it was spec'd with, so all is good in the world.

Good on Trek to take care of business, did it right by sending the post without having to send the old post back in advance 

My GG Smash is likely delayed until the end of July, so it looks me and my buddy will be together for a longer stretch... nice bike, mixed feelings about seeing her go.


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

It's alive.....My Full Stache XL build at 30.01 lbs
-Line 40 hoops with I9 hubs.
-Guide Ultimate brakes with 180mm Ceterline X rotors F&R.
-Line dropper post with Affinity Pro RXL carbon saddle.
-XO1 cranks and derailleur with 11 speed XX1 cassette. 
-RaceFace Next riser bars
-Crank Bros Stamp 7 large pedals. 
-29x3.0 Chupacabras


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Nice bike, but I expect you'll find the bike will want more meat on them wheels.

Where did you find the weight loss? Fork?



ethierjung said:


> It's alive.....My Full Stache XL build at 30.01 lbs
> -Line 40 hoops with I9 hubs.
> -Guide Ultimate brakes with 180mm Ceterline X rotors F&R.
> -Line dropper post with Affinity Pro RXL carbon saddle.
> ...


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

mikesee said:


> Your opinion is as valid as anyone else's here, but I have to wonder: Ever have anything positive to say -- about anything?
> 
> Your posts are becoming the proverbial wet blanket. And no, what this world needs is not more negativity.


If the reach wasn't too short I wouldn't say it was too short.

What was the point of you post? Get over whatever you need to get over, that's what the world needs.


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> Nice bike, but I expect you'll find the bike will want more meat on them wheels.
> Where did you find the weight loss? Fork?


 I have some Minions mounted on some I9 BC 360 wheels when I need them. Might try out some 2.8 Minions on the carbon wheels. I don't have much trust in the Chups on loose over hard. 
Actually I found weight gain as this was a swap from my carbon Stache 9.8 that weighed 24lbs. Changing to the Full Stache frame and adding a dropper netted 6 lbs gain.
Carbon bars, hoops, seat, cranks. I9 hubs, XX1 cassette, Stamp pedals are all pretty light. Even the Guide Ultimate brake setup is lighter than most. Not sure if the Fox is lighter than the Pike as I haven't looked.


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

:madman:Well, I wish they had 2.8 Minions


----------



## kellyc (Apr 3, 2007)

Has anyone tried Codes on their build? I'm tempted to go straight to Codes for my new frame up build. I've got Guides with 180 rotors front and rear on my 2017 9.6 Stache that I race in the HT class in enduros and they're barely enough. I can't imagine running the same brakes on my new Full Stache build. I figure I'd start with at least a Code with a 200 rotor in the front and a Guide with 180 rotor in the back.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

kellyc said:


> Has anyone tried Codes on their build? I'm tempted to go straight to Codes for my new frame up build. I've got Guides on my 2017 9.6 Stache that I race in the HT class in enduros and they're barely enough. I can't imagine running the same brakes on my new Full Stache Build. I figure I'd start with at least a Code with a 200 rotor in the front and a Guide with 180 rotor in the back.


HT class?

I run Saints on my 9.8 (203/180), blissfully light lever effort compared to Guides.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

I'm on XTs with 203/180. Love it.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

They work fine, I ride quite fast and hard, long downhills, no issues. I'm not a huge fan of Guides because they tend to fail, so I much prefer Shimano.

Big rotors don't increase stopping power, though they increase cooling marginally, they are certainly more prone to getting bent.

Not trying to start an argument about rotor size, but think about it: pads and contact surface are constant reagardless of rotor diameter.

If you want more braking power, get a twin piston caliper with more contact surface.



kellyc said:


> Has anyone tried Codes on their build? I'm tempted to go straight to Codes for my new frame up build. I've got Guides with 180 rotors front and rear on my 2017 9.6 Stache that I race in the HT class in enduros and they're barely enough. I can't imagine running the same brakes on my new Full Stache build. I figure I'd start with at least a Code with a 200 rotor in the front and a Guide with 180 rotor in the back.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Nurse Ben said:


> Nice bike, but I expect you'll find the bike will want more meat on them wheels.
> 
> Where did you find the weight loss? Fork?


I'd say its largely in the tires.


----------



## russmu66 (Nov 11, 2007)

OK...here's a weird one. Changing the fork internals on my Full Stache from 130 mm travel to 140 mm travel. My mechanic called me to say that he'd removed the original air shaft and found it was marked as a 29er 120 mm shaft. is this a peculiarity of the plus sized fork? Following this logic, if I install the 140 mm shaft I have, will my fork then be 150 mm travel? Anyone able to shed some light?

Cheers Muz.


----------



## Lone Rager (Dec 13, 2013)

Nurse Ben said:


> ...Not trying to start an argument about rotor size, but think about it: pads and contact surface are constant reagardless of rotor diameter...


You are right. It is not the pad and contact surface that increase braking power with larger rotor diameter. It is the larger rotor diameter itself. The same pads and contact surface create the same braking force at the rotor, but since the rotor has a larger diameter, the torque is greater. Another way to look at is that with a larger rotor, the circumference of the rotor is greater so more of the rotor surface goes through the pads per wheel wheel revolution. More distance at the same force is more energy dissipated.


----------



## huckleberry hound (Feb 27, 2015)

Nurse Ben said:


> They work fine, I ride quite fast and hard, long downhills, no issues. I'm not a huge fan of Guides because they tend to fail, so I much prefer Shimano.
> 
> Big rotors don't increase stopping power, though they increase cooling marginally, they are certainly more prone to getting bent.
> 
> ...


Nope rotor size does make a difference. Larger rotors increases the brakes leverage. That is why the rotors are so large on a Buell motorcycle. It's single large rotor has the same stopping power as a dual disk setup found on most motorcycles in it's class but the single disc weighs less than a dual disc setup. If rotor size didn't make a difference then we might as well just use 160mm disc because they weigh less.

_"I went back to a basic principle of physics to move the state of the art: reduce unsprung weight. Buells changed from dual discs to the largest possible single disc conventional disc, with a big six piston caliper, which made the front wheel lighter. Maximum rotor diameter was limited by the caliper having to fit into the wheel rim profile, and then the disc was smaller than that, because the caliper had to bridge over the top of the disc. In order to be stiff and not flex, that bridge had to be substantial.
__"To get more stopping power out of a single disc, I needed more diameter; the only way to do that would be an inside out rotor. To address the issues of direct rim mounting, I designed a caliper with long thin pads so the rotor swept width could be kept to a minimum. We used a totally new front wheel concept based on the idea that without braking loads being fed through the hub and back out through the spokes, then there would be no torsional loads through those spokes. That enabled us to take a significant amount of weight out of the wheel"._ Source https://ultimatemotorcycling.com/2008/02/01/erik_buell_motorcycle/


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Larger rotors definitely increase braking power and cool more easily. After so many XT failures in my riding group and my personal bikes I got Codes on the new bike to wait out this generation of Shimano brake. The Codes work great. Lots of power and nice modulation. I'm running 203/180mm rotors on an aggressive 29er. No issues.

I like having interchangeable pads and bleeding procedures so I'll probably go back to Shimano once they redesign their brakes for the next release.


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

mikesee said:


> I'd say its largely in the tires.


The Chups are 850 grams, the Minions are 1150.

I put the Minions mounted on I9 BC 360 aluminum wheels on the bike and it definitely rails better. Getting some wheel or frame flex in hard right handers as the tire contacts the left chain stay making a RRRRTTT sound and some vibration.


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

kellyc said:


> Has anyone tried Codes on their build? I'm tempted to go straight to Codes for my new frame up build. I've got Guides with 180 rotors front and rear on my 2017 9.6 Stache that I race in the HT class in enduros and they're barely enough. I can't imagine running the same brakes on my new Full Stache build. I figure I'd start with at least a Code with a 200 rotor in the front and a Guide with 180 rotor in the back.


 I have Ultimates (NOT LEVEL ULTIMATES) with 180mm rotors front and rear. the bike will stop on a dime unless the hill is too steep or loose for traction and I weigh 207 right now. Just 1 finger braking and great modulation. The bleeding process is very critical on the Guides.
I might try out some Maguras on my next build.


----------



## kellyc (Apr 3, 2007)

richde said:


> HT class?
> 
> I run Saints on my 9.8 (203/180), blissfully light lever effort compared to Guides.


Sorry. 
HT= Hard Tail class


----------



## kellyc (Apr 3, 2007)

ethierjung said:


> :madman:Well, I wish they had 2.8 Minions


Lol. Yeah. 2.8 Minions or XR4s would be nice.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

The difference is not significant on a bike, 180-200mm rotor is very small change.

If brake fade is causing reduced braking effectiveness, then either a stronger caliper/braking ratio, change fluid, change pads, or a different kind of rotor to reduce heat, or a combination of these changes.

If the braking power is not adequate and the brake is not overheating, then no change in rotor size will improve stopping.

That's the take away point ^



huckleberry hound said:


> Nope rotor size does make a difference. Larger rotors increases the brakes leverage. That is why the rotors are so large on a Buell motorcycle. It's single large rotor has the same stopping power as a dual disk setup found on most motorcycles in it's class but the single disc weighs less than a dual disc setup. If rotor size didn't make a difference then we might as well just use 160mm disc because they weigh less.
> 
> _"I went back to a basic principle of physics to move the state of the art: reduce unsprung weight. Buells changed from dual discs to the largest possible single disc conventional disc, with a big six piston caliper, which made the front wheel lighter. Maximum rotor diameter was limited by the caliper having to fit into the wheel rim profile, and then the disc was smaller than that, because the caliper had to bridge over the top of the disc. In order to be stiff and not flex, that bridge had to be substantial.
> __"To get more stopping power out of a single disc, I needed more diameter; the only way to do that would be an inside out rotor. To address the issues of direct rim mounting, I designed a caliper with long thin pads so the rotor swept width could be kept to a minimum. We used a totally new front wheel concept based on the idea that without braking loads being fed through the hub and back out through the spokes, then there would be no torsional loads through those spokes. That enabled us to take a significant amount of weight out of the wheel"._ Source https://ultimatemotorcycling.com/2008/02/01/erik_buell_motorcycle/
> ...


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Yes.

3" will rub on the chain, never had chainstay rub.

2.6-2.8 have been interference free.



ethierjung said:


> The Chups are 850 grams, the Minions are 1150.
> 
> I put the Minions mounted on I9 BC 360 aluminum wheels on the bike and it definitely rails better. Getting some wheel or frame flex in hard right handers as the tire contacts the left chain stay making a RRRRTTT sound and some vibration.
> View attachment 1202325


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

ethierjung said:


> The Chups are 850 grams, the Minions are 1150.


Exactly. 600g is the biggest chunk of what you lost. Not likely that any other part swapped made as dramatic of a difference in weight. Also not likely that any other part will make as dramatic of a difference in traction. XR2's are fast and supple, but nowhere near the level of traction/confidence as the XR4's. No free lunch.


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

mikesee said:


> Exactly. 600g is the biggest chunk of what you lost.


:nono: Once again, I didn't loose weight, I gained 6lbs changing from a large carbon Stache frame to an XL Full Stache frame and adding a dropper.


----------



## RobertH (Oct 19, 2007)

I bought an XL (6-1, 35 inseam, long arms) a couple of weeks ago, having alot of fun on it. Changed the front pad to sintered, that helped the braking alot. I weigh 203, running 15 / 18 psi.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Trek finally got the revised stems completed, received a 40mm stem yesterday, got it installed, decided to pull one volume spacer to soften the ride; the stock fork comes with three volume spacers installed.

Felt short initially, kind of suprising that 10mm can make that much difference, but after a couple short spins it feels just right.

I measure the reach with the new stem and it's equal to the reach on my Wozo, which confirms my sense of what "feels right" for me.

The only thing I'm struggling with on the Full Stache is th elow stack. I have the bar height maxed, ~1.5" of spacers and it feels low. Low stack is not a bad thing in general, but on the Full Stache I kinda feel like they needed to have a tad taller head tube. 

Anyway, not a game changer, the stack just feels more XC than I like; even with a 140mm travel fork. I'm contemplating a bump to 150mm just for giggles


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

IMO, you add a volume spacer to soften the ride. More volume spacers equals more sag without bottoming out because it becomes more progressive. So more initial sag means better small bump compliance but still doesn't bottom out.

Right or all-wet?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Wet.

The reason to take up volume is so the fork ramps up quicker, reducing the need for higher pressures to prevent bottoming out. It's a big rider fix, but it's not really a fix so much as a way around the limitations of air forks.

I find the Solo Air Pike 29+ to be a pretty solid fork, running 75psi and two volume spacers feels good, might try a single spacer after I increase the travel to 150mm; ordered an air shaft today ?



chelboed said:


> IMO, you add a volume spacer to soften the ride. More volume spacers equals more sag without bottoming out because it becomes more progressive. So more initial sag means better small bump compliance but still doesn't bottom out.
> 
> Right or all-wet?


----------



## Lone Rager (Dec 13, 2013)

Nurse Ben said:


> ...The reason to take up volume is so the fork ramps up quicker, reducing the need for higher pressures to prevent bottoming out. It's a big rider fix, but it's not really a fix so much as a way around the limitations of air forks...


Actually, it can be considered one of the advantages of air forks. The progressiveness allows for an effectively lower better riding spring rate for small and moderate bumps and an increasing rate to absorb big hits nearing full travel. Look at the Push Industries ACS3 coil conversion as an example. It includes a small short separate air spring that engages as the fork nears full travel which has the effect of ramping up the rate.

The ability to adjust both air pressure and air spring volume provides tunability. Springs are only tunable for preload.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

chelboed said:


> IMO, you add a volume spacer to soften the ride. More volume spacers equals more sag without bottoming out because it becomes more progressive. So more initial sag means better small bump compliance but still doesn't bottom out.
> 
> Right or all-wet?





Nurse Ben said:


> Wet.
> 
> The reason to take up volume is so the fork ramps up quicker, reducing the need for higher pressures to prevent bottoming out. It's a big rider fix, but it's not really a fix so much as a way around the limitations of air forks.
> 
> I find the Solo Air Pike 29+ to be a pretty solid fork, running 75psi and two volume spacers feels good, might try a single spacer after I increase the travel to 150mm; ordered an air shaft today ?


You're both right. Just depends on what you're after.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Air is not progressive unless a spring is added, kinda funny in my mind cuz you might as well just make it all spring 

I ran a CC IL Coil shock on my Fatillac, the coil was so supple and progressive. My Smash is coming with a CC DB Coil shock and a MRP Stage Coil fork.

So yeah, air is fine, it works, you get decent performance at a reasonable weight.

Coil springs are not just tubable for preload, they can actually be designed for varying progressions, just depends on who makes the spring and what they choose to do with it.

I ran a variety of springs for my custom telemark set ups, it was very educational to vary spring lengths, rates, and combining springs to change the feel.

Steel is real when it comes to bike suspension.

As Mike has pointed out many times, the ideal suspension is the one you don't notice, it literally disappears beneath you. This is one of the things I think Trek got right on the Full Stache, the suspension works so well you don't notice it. The fork on the other hand... but it's getting better 



Lone Rager said:


> Actually, it can be considered one of the advantages of air forks. The progressiveness allows for an effectively lower better riding spring rate for small and moderate bumps and an increasing rate to absorb big hits nearing full travel. Look at the Push Industries ACS3 coil conversion as an example. It includes a small short separate air spring that engages as the fork nears full travel which has the effect of ramping up the rate.
> 
> The ability to adjust both air pressure and air spring volume provides tunability. Springs are only tunable for preload.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

Air vs. Coil??

With lots of testing and a conclusion.
https://enduro-mtb.com/en/air-versus-coil-shock/


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

There were actually two conclusions.



richwolf said:


> Air vs. Coil??
> 
> With lots of testing and a conclusion.
> https://enduro-mtb.com/en/air-versus-coil-shock/


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

Nurse Ben said:


> Trek finally got the revised stems completed, received a 40mm stem yesterday, got it installed, decided to pull one volume spacer to soften the ride; the stock fork comes with three volume spacers installed.
> 
> Felt short initially, kind of suprising that 10mm can make that much difference, but after a couple short spins it feels just right.
> 
> ...


I asked the local bike chain I bought my medium Full Stache from if they could increase the fork travel to 140 mm and pointed out the 140 mm sag settings printed on the fork.

I called today to check on it and found out my bike is finished...but they told me they could only increase the travel to 150 mm (not 140 mm)...geez.

I guess I'll be leaving my mino-link in the low position.

The stack was noticeably lower than my other bikes...I didn't like the XC feel...but I only intended increasing the travel 10 mm and adding riser bars.

Now I'll probably leave the bars alone...

I picked up a 150 mm One Up Components dropper but could only find 30.9...so I got a problem solvers shim...so they are telling me they do not recommend using a shim on a high-end bike...

I'm going to pick it up tomorrow...I'm hoping I won't need to have someone else put the fork travel back down to 140 mm.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

You need to find a more skilled bike shop, that fork can be run in increments of 10mm from 120-150mm. You may like 150mm, I just ordered another air shaft to increase travel from 140mm to 150mm.

On the dropper... don't shim it, that's not stable. Instead get the right diameter seat post.



jbsocal said:


> I asked the local bike chain I bought my medium Full Stache from if they could increase the fork travel to 140 mm and pointed out the 140 mm sag settings printed on the fork.
> 
> I called today to check on it and found out my bike is finished...but they told me they could only increase the travel to 150 mm (not 140 mm)...geez.
> 
> ...


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Nurse Ben said:


> On the dropper... don't shim it, that's not stable. Instead get the right diameter seat post.


Shims have worked just fine on seatposts since forever.


----------



## croatiansensation (Feb 21, 2005)

mikesee said:


> Shims have worked just fine on seatposts since forever.


Agreed, they work just fine. I used one for years on my v1.0 Surly Instigator.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

They work great until they're rightly used as a justification to deny a warrantee claim. 

If you can't afford a new post, why are you buying a new bike.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

richde said:


> They work great until they're rightly used as a justification to deny a warrantee claim.
> 
> If you can't afford a new post, why are you buying a new bike.


Dang, we got a hot take here.

@jbsocal - was there anything wrong with the post that came with it or just too short? I saw a few different notes where people were able to get their post warrantied for longer ones.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

richde said:


> They work great until they're rightly used as a justification to deny a warrantee claim.
> 
> If you can't afford a new post, why are you buying a new bike.


Just make sure you put on the original post when doing the warranty claim! Chances are you will never need to warranty it anyways.

I use shims on several bikes with no problems. But if you are going to buy a new bike with a new post I would suggest you get the right sized one in the first place.

At what point does changing a bike invalidate the warranty?? Different wheels, tires, bars, stem, saddle, stickers???


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

richwolf said:


> At what point does changing a bike invalidate the warranty?? Different wheels, tires, bars, stem, saddle, stickers???


Probably at the point you change suspension length unless it's rated for that change. I thought the issue with the shim is that the seat post was now only supported by 2 inches of frame where the shim overlaps instead of the typical 'minimum insertion' line amount of frame?

If it were carbon I'd definitely hesitate because it seems like every broken trek mtb frame I've ever seen has been at the seat-tube/top-tube junction area.


----------



## JohnMcL7 (Jul 26, 2013)

richwolf said:


> At what point does changing a bike invalidate the warranty?? Different wheels, tires, bars, stem, saddle, stickers???


When the replacement part is responsible for the mechanical failure, I think it was a thread on here that someone had used a shim and the seat tube had cracked so the frame manufacturer refused the warranty claim. Whether that's right or not is another issue but at the same time I don't think it's right to mock that potential as irrelevant.

John


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

JohnMcL7 said:


> When the replacement part is responsible for the mechanical failure, I think it was a thread on here that someone had used a shim and the seat tube had cracked so the frame manufacturer refused the warranty claim. Whether that's right or not is another issue but at the same time I don't think it's right to mock that potential as irrelevant.
> 
> John


Who was I mocking??


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

richwolf said:


> At what point does changing a bike invalidate the warranty?? Different wheels, tires, bars, stem, saddle, stickers???


The point where one size is called for and you use a different one?

Lots of people do lots of things and don't have problems, but not everyone gets away with it.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

richde said:


> The point where one size is called for and you use a different one?
> 
> Lots of people do lots of things and don't have problems, but not everyone gets away with it.


I guess I will just continue living dangerously and take my chances!


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

MrIcky said:


> Dang, we got a hot take here.
> 
> @jbsocal - was there anything wrong with the post that came with it or just too short? I saw a few different notes where people were able to get their post warrantied for longer ones.


I just prefer 150's (what I have on my other bikes).

This frame has the least seat post insertion depth of my bikes.

I've got a 28" inseam, so I need some insertion depth, else it will be too high for me to use the full travel of the dropper.

I will have it installed with the shim (this shim is 100 mm).

All my other bikes have a 30.9 seat tubes...so I can use it on another bike if it doesn't fit on this one.


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

Nurse Ben said:


> You need to find a more skilled bike shop, that fork can be run in increments of 10mm from 120-150mm. You may like 150mm, I just ordered another air shaft to increase travel from 140mm to 150mm.
> 
> On the dropper... don't shim it, that's not stable. Instead get the right diameter seat post.


They increased it to 150...looks like about 146 mm from top of seal to crown...is that normal for a 150 mm Pike?

Forgot to ask them about tokens...they didn't pay attention.

They did say it was an easy mod...

From two short rides, seems like I was using much less travel than expected.

LBS had it set for 102 psi...I'm going to try it around 87.

I don't want to screw with tokens...so I guess a MRP Ramp Contol cartridge might be in my future, looks like MRP makes one that will fit this Pike.

I have a MRP Stage, I like running it soft and being able to change the ramp up with a knob.

That shop doesn't encourage customizations...they almost wouldn't install Huck Norris because they didn't know what it was and assumed it would be difficult to install.

The other shops I normally use don't sell Trek...so I won't have that LBS customize anything else.

*** I wasn't considering that they want to avoid any warranty issues...


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

jbsocal said:


> From two short rides, seems like I was using much less travel than expected.
> 
> LBS had it set for 102 psi...I'm going to try it around 87.
> 
> I don't want to screw with tokens...so I guess a MRP Ramp Contol cartridge might be in my future, looks like MRP makes one that will fit this Pike.


That sounds like too much pressure. Tokens are dead easy to install and next to free. I have a MRP RC cartridge in a Pike and a Pike with tokens. The RC works as advertised, but I wouldn't bother buying another. The tokens work great and are so cheap.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

My last comment on the seatpost shim thing. I googled images of cracked seat tubes and there seems to be plenty that don't involve a shim.
Also the seatpost clamp really only puts maximum pressure on a very small area. Why don't they also clamp the seatpost a second time further down the seat tube? Stems and handlebars usually clamp down over two areas but the clamping area is usually less than the length of most seat tube shims.


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

Used a seat post shim on a fatbike and the frame (seat tube) cracked right where the shim ended in about 300 miles (manufacturer denied the claim cause I was honest about the shim use), and it was a royal pain in the ass to micro adjust up and down to. Going forward I will spend the money of the right size post.


----------



## Twelsch42 (Jun 10, 2018)

richwolf said:


> Also the seatpost clamp really only puts maximum pressure on a very small area. Why don't they also clamp the seatpost a second time further down the seat tube?


Because of the line that says 'don't extend past this point.'

Your seat tube is a big lever. If a good portion of the tube doesn't rest against the frame - extra force will be focused on areas not built for those forces. And then break.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

Twelsch42 said:


> Because of the line that says 'don't extend past this point.'
> 
> Your seat tube is a big lever. If a good portion of the tube doesn't rest against the frame - extra force will be focused on areas not built for those forces. And then break.


Perhaps even more of an argument for more than one clamp.

I also wasn't suggesting to extend the post beyond the minimum insertion line.

It seems a lot of riders are going with frames with a lot of seatpost showing. This creates even more leverage.


----------



## BlueCheesehead (Jul 17, 2010)

richwolf said:


> Perhaps even more of an argument for more than one clamp.
> 
> I also wasn't suggesting to extend the post beyond the minimum insertion line.
> 
> It seems a lot of riders are going with frames with a lot of seatpost showing. This creates even more leverage.


No, the clamp serves one purpose: to keep the post from sliding up or down. Placing one down low would do little to "tighten" the tube to post connection unless one were to split the seat tube like they do a the top so that it would compress. That would actually be a weaker design.

The maximum torque exerted on a seat tube by a seat post (properly sized) is when the post is extended to the minimum insertion line. At that point one has the largest lever outside of the seat tube and the smallest resisting lever inside the seat tube resulting the largest force multiplier. Certainly a company should warrant a frame where the proper post is installed to the minimum insertion line. If a shim is the same length as the distance from the end of a post to the minimum insertion line then there would be no difference in force exerted on the seat tube. A company should warrant that based on engineering terms, but may refuse for financial reasons.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

BlueCheesehead said:


> No, the clamp serves one purpose: to keep the post from sliding up or down. Placing one down low would do little to "tighten" the tube to post connection unless one were to split the seat tube like they do a the top so that it would compress. That would actually be a weaker design.
> 
> The maximum torque exerted on a seat tube by a seat post (properly sized) is when the post is extended to the minimum insertion line. At that point one has the largest lever outside of the seat tube and the smallest resisting lever inside the seat tube resulting the largest force multiplier. Certainly a company should warrant a frame where the proper post is installed to the minimum insertion line. If a shim is the same length as the distance from the end of a post to the minimum insertion line then there would be no difference in force exerted on the seat tube. A company should warrant that based on engineering terms, but may refuse for financial reasons.


That makes sense to me.
Of course the clamp also keeps it from twisting.

I guess all of us with shims can sleep better at night 🌃!


----------



## BlueCheesehead (Jul 17, 2010)

richwolf said:


> ...
> Of course the clamp also keeps it from twisting.


Good point, I forgot about that.


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

vikb said:


> That sounds like too much pressure. Tokens are dead easy to install and next to free. I have a MRP RC cartridge in a Pike and a Pike with tokens. The RC works as advertised, but I wouldn't bother buying another. The tokens work great and are so cheap.


You were right, I don't know who runs those pressures printed on the fork.

Seemed like something was wrong with the fork when I picked it up after the upgrade, it seemed like it wouldn't compress...but it was Ok after letting some air out and pumping it through the travel for a bit.

I weigh 237 lbs suited up, by the chart it recommends 105, but it feels good around 78 psi (not sure how accuate my digital shock pump is).

On my last ride, the ring was about 4 or 5 mm from bottoming (which is about what I was looking for based on the trail I was riding), so at this point, I don't need to change the tokens.

Will put my ShockWiz on it later, just to see what it says.


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

On the subject of shims...

All of my spare handlebars are 31.8 mm but the Bontrager Knock block stem is 35 mm.

I’m now running SQL Lab 30X aluminum bars on my FS...so I had to use a problem solvers 35 mm shim.

I hope there won’t be any issues with running a shim in the stem also.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

vikb said:


> That sounds like too much pressure. Tokens are dead easy to install and next to free. I have a MRP RC cartridge in a Pike and a Pike with tokens. The RC works as advertised, but I wouldn't bother buying another. The tokens work great and are so cheap.


So cheap in fact, if you ask your local mechanic, he'll probably pull out a drawer filled with them and hand you a couple...


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Bumped the travel to 150mm, first ride today, felt good, handling is just right, improved B.B. height.

I used the upgraded air shaft that RS just released, very smooth and supple.


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

NB...high or low on the mino link?


----------



## noosa2 (May 20, 2004)

ethierjung said:


> :madman:Well, I wish they had 2.8 Minions


Yep.


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

Nurse Ben said:


> Bumped the travel to 150mm, first ride today, felt good, handling is just right, improved B.B. height.
> 
> I used the upgraded air shaft that RS just released, very smooth and supple.
> 
> View attachment 1203919


NB,

I'm terms of BB height preference, are you referring to running 27.5 Plus or both?

I noticed that label says Lyrik/Yari...my fork was upgraded with the Pike version...do you know what is different/improved?

I like mine better at 150 mm, but I can't compare against 140 mm since the LBS installed 150 mm instead.

I rode my Prime converted 29 Plus with DHF 3.0's back to back with my Full Stache today.

I still really liked riding the Prime +...wheel base is shorter and the chainstay is longer...the MRP Stage 150 mm and the CCDB IL are plush...there just isn't much tire clearance.

I get some intermittent noise on the Prime +, but haven't figured out why or where...it does not sound like tire rubbing...I assume it is brake disc related.

Since both are now equivalent in terms of travel and there is plenty of tire clearance on the FS, I'm going to sell my Prime + and keep the FS.

If I could fit 29 x 3.0 DHF's or XR4's on either my Enduro 29 or Marin Wolf Ridge Pro (it looks like one will fit only on the front), I probably wouldn't keep the Full Stache.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Low.



71 10-7 said:


> NB...high or low on the mino link?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I like big wheels, so I always preferred 29ers, I rode 27+ for a bit, it's a fine tire size, but 29+ is faster and bridges obstacles better. Only downside of big wheels is a longer wheelbase.

The air shaft I'm using is specd for the Pike Plus per SRAM. I like longer travel, rode 150 on my Fatillac, would take 160mm but it's probably too much for everyday use. I do wish the backend was 140mm.

Ridden hard I get a fair amounts of chainstay flex, it's more an annoyance than anything. My Smash is gonna be a while, so me and green bomber will be together for a minute.



jbsocal said:


> NB,
> 
> I'm terms of BB height preference, are you referring to running 27.5 Plus or both?
> 
> ...


----------



## RobertH (Oct 19, 2007)

NB - I'm following your updates, thank you for posting them.

I changed my bar to a Renthal FatBar and that's it so far. I'm running the Mino in high right now but if I update the fork I'll change it to low, the low position suits me better but I'm riding in rock gardens and I want a little extra BB height.

I'm showing MPN: 00.4019.931.001 - RockShox - Air Springs & Parts for the 150mm Pike and the color is grey.

https://sram-cdn-pull-zone-gsdesign...05734_service_manual_debonair_upgrade_kit.pdf


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

Ok thx. I bumped my fork up to 140 and like running the mino in the low, really like it set up this way over the 130 front. Don’t notice any negatives on the climbing and it feels really balanced on the descents.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

The updated air shaft is worth the money, it's super silky, far smoother than the oem stuff.

Got four big rides on the 150/130 set up, love the ride.

Just a heads up: check those pivots and reapply loctite if you adjust the mino link. I had a loose mino link, never had a pivot loosen before, turned out three out of four pivot bolts were loose ?



RobertH said:


> NB - I'm following your updates, thank you for posting them.
> 
> I changed my bar to a Renthal FatBar and that's it so far. I'm running the Mino in high right now but if I update the fork I'll change it to low, the low position suits me better but I'm riding in rock gardens and I want a little extra BB height.
> 
> ...


----------



## RobertH (Oct 19, 2007)

I ordered the air shaft. I will check my pivot bolts, thanks for the heads up.

Checked my pivot bolts, a couple were a tad loose, glad I have good torque wrenches.


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

Just in case it wasn't clear in NB's posts, here is a shot of the 130mm air shaft. It is NOT marked for the Pike, but the Lyrik/Yari. The 150mm shaft went in super easy.


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

steelerector said:


> View attachment 1204747
> View attachment 1204748
> 
> 
> Just in case it wasn't clear in NB's posts, here is a shot of the 130mm air shaft. It is NOT marked for the Pike, but the Lyrik/Yari. The 150mm shaft went in super easy.


The shaft the LBS gave me back is marked Pike 29 120 mm...wonder how that could happen?

Also, here is the package...


I'm wondering if I should have someone else get the right part and redo it?

Anyone know what the difference is between the part the LBS installed vs the Lyric/Yari version?

I'm not gonna have that place do anything [email protected]#K!

Thanks for posting the pic.

I can only assume that besides installing the wrong part, they did not give me the part they took out!

I initially gave them the serial number of the fork so they could order the correct part...


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

According to the guys at Worldwide Cycles, there's a SRAM website that has all the forks by listed by serial number, they use the site to determine air shafts. But, it was wrong for the Pike 29+, so they called SRAM and got the correct part number.

The revised air shafts are common between Lyric and Pike, old air Shaft are Pike specific but you need to add 10mm more to compensate for the "plus".

The new air shaft is much better.



jbsocal said:


> The shaft the LBS gave me back is marked Pike 29 120 mm...wonder how that could happen?
> 
> Also, here is the package...
> 
> ...


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

Nurse Ben said:


> According to the guys at Worldwide Cycles, there's a SRAM website that has all the forks by listed by serial number, they use the site to determine air shafts. But, it was wrong for the Pike 29+, so they called SRAM and got the correct part number.
> 
> The revised air shafts are common between Lyric and Pike, old air Shaft are Pike specific but you need to add 10mm more to compensate for the "plus".
> 
> The new air shaft is much better.


NB,

I really appreciate the info.

Sounds like I can't blame them for installing the wrong part since SRAM's site listed the wrong part.

I am pissed that they did not return what they removed, I'm guessing someone saw Lyrik/Yari printed on it and decided it could not have been from my Pike (so they give me a spare Pike 29 120 mm air shaft instead?).

I'm going to call them tomorrow to see if they still have my old air shaft.

They upgraded travel on a Fox fork for me on my first mountain bike I bought some time ago...so I figured they could upgrade his one.


----------



## russmu66 (Nov 11, 2007)

jbsocal said:


> The shaft the LBS gave me back is marked Pike 29 120 mm...wonder how that could happen?
> 
> Also, here is the package...
> 
> ...


From my experience, your bike shop is not in the wrong. The air shaft that came out of my fork on my Full Stache was also labelled as "Pike 29 120". It's to do with the fact it is a 29+ fork, not a standard 29 fork. To change my fork to 140 mm travel...we fitted a 130 mm Pike 29 shaft.
Cheers Muz


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

russmu66 said:


> From my experience, your bike shop is not in the wrong. The air shaft that came out of my fork on my Full Stache was also labelled as "Pike 29 120". It's to do with the fact it is a 29+ fork, not a standard 29 fork. To change my fork to 140 mm travel...we fitted a 130 mm Pike 29 shaft.
> Cheers Muz


Ok, thanks, so SRAM must have used different air shafts on the pike 29+ depending on manufactured date...mine must be an older model without the newer Debonair air shaft.


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

Update: the 150mm upgrade felt great on the trails today. I was lapping my local lift acces Park so I had the Mino in low. Had the pressure at about 95# and didn’t bottom out, even on big hits. I’ll probably back off an few #s. The bike handled great, but it’ll take some getting used to, as I’m just not used to that much travel up front. Bike was great though.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I think the Full Stache deserves more fork, but just imagine another 10-15mm travel out back and a stiff swing arm!


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Ben, you should have gotten a Lens... It sounds more your speed.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

The Lenz suspensoin has a different feel, less progressive (?), not the sort of ride I want; I had a Fatillac, same suspension.

Most of the time I like how the F Stache rides, it's just flexy in that back end so if I hammer off jumps and do anything off angle on my landing, it get's loose. I get tire rub with a 2.6, so at my weight it's not a go big bike until the frame gets beefed up.

Sadly there are not many choices in this genre unless I go custom, so I'm having to step down to a frame that'll only take a 2.6, but maybe someday...

For most folks the F Stache will be fine. I certainly like the 150mm fork 



chelboed said:


> Ben, you should have gotten a Lens... It sounds more your speed.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

chelboed said:


> Ben, you should have gotten a Lens... It sounds more your speed.


Of course the Lenz has a great suspension feel and the Stache rear end doesn't flex!

But when you are a member of the bike of the month club these things get overlooked until they don't get overlooked!


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Hey Rich, as I explained in my PM, I have blocked your posts. 

If you continue to be ugly, I'll flag you for the administrators. 

Try to be nice, it won't hurt you.


----------



## the mayor (Nov 18, 2004)

Nurse Ben said:


> Hey Rich, as I explained in my PM, I have blocked your posts.
> 
> If you continue to be ugly, I'll flag you for the administrators.
> 
> Try to be nice, it won't hurt you.


If you have him blocked...how are you replying to him?
You never cease to amaze.....
You gonna flag me too, Captain Butthurt?


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)




----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Funny, I’ve had the Mayor blocked for a while... and he’s the one to reply 

The key to blocking folks is doing it before you respond back in kind and you gotta avoid readjng their blocked posts. 

I got ten or so blocked posters, about half are from the ebike forum, no surprise there.

Still digging on the Full Stache, it’s the only bike I’ve been riding since I bought it, probably got another month or two before the Smash arrives. Heading to Vancouver Island and BC next month.


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

the mayor said:


> If you have him blocked...how are you replying to him?
> You never cease to amaze.....
> You gonna flag me too, Captain Butthurt?


On Tapatalk it says the post is blocked, but then you can tap it to reveal it.

I have only a couple people blocked, but would occasionally read their posts anyway in case they said something useful.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

richwolf said:


> Of course the Lenz has a great suspension feel and the Stache rear end doesn't flex!
> 
> But when you are a member of the bike of the month club these things get overlooked until they don't get overlooked!


I´m on my Full Stache now for about 2 months and I cannot deny that I can feel a little bit of flex in the back, especially when it´s getting rough and really fast, even with 40 mm carbon rims. This little bit of flex doesn´t bother or worry me, it has no influence on the capabilities of the bike, but it´s noticeable and this is a fact, at least concerning my bike.

This week I will also receive my 150 mm dropper; Trek agreed to take the 125 mm back and send me a new one.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

Part of the flex has to be coming from the elevated stay on the drive side. Same with the Stache hardtail and how it doesn't always play well with single speeders. 

The bottom bracket area takes some of the greatest stresses so when you take one of it's supporting members (the chainstay area) and move it up then you are reducing it's stiffness.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I was able to keep my 125mm post until the 150mm post arrived, so maybe check with your LBS and see if they can do that.

The Trek post is not bad, gets kinda wiggly over time, probably not a post I'd buy if it didn't come with my bike.



Geniusbiker said:


> I´m on my Full Stache now for about 2 months and I cannot deny that I can feel a little bit of flex in the back, especially when it´s getting rough and really fast, even with 40 mm carbon rims. This little bit of flex doesn´t bother or worry me, it has no influence on the capabilities of the bike, but it´s noticeable and this is a fact, at least concerning my bike.
> 
> This week I will also receive my 150 mm dropper; Trek agreed to take the 125 mm back and send me a new one.


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

In case anyone with short legs (28” inseam) wants to run a 150 mm dropper on a medium FS:

The One Up Components 150 mm Dropper will fit...I can use the full travel without being too high.

I didn’t think there was enough insertion depth on this frame, but the One Up 150 mm was only like 3 mm longer than the stock Bontrager 125 mm (from the bottom of collar to where the cable inserts).

I bought the One Up shims for $10 to shorten the travel (you can adjust/shorten the travel to whatever, like 145 mm or 140 mm), but I didn’t need to use it.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I have one of those posts sitting on my bench waiting for my new build. Looks like a nice post, inexpensive, adjustable, and so far the reviews are good.



jbsocal said:


> In case anyone with short legs (28" inseam) wants to run a 150 mm dropper on a medium FS:
> 
> The One Up Components 150 mm Dropper will fit...I can use the full travel without being too high.
> 
> ...


----------



## kellyc (Apr 3, 2007)

Anybody try a Yari at 140mm on their Full Stache build?

I was going to do a Pike at 130, but I've got a Yari on my hardtail stache and I really like the stiff 35mm sanctions. 

Any thoughts apprecaited.

Based on other posts, it sounds like the frame can handle a small increase in fork travel and still maintain climbing and all day rideablity.


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

kellyc said:


> I was going to do a Pike at 130, but I've got a Yari on my hardtail stache and I really like the stiff 35mm sanctions.


The Pike has 35mm stanchions.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

The Pike and Yari both have 35mm stanchions. The Yari uses the chassis from the Lyrik. Thicker, stiffer, stronger tubing. More lateral and Axial rigidity.

Pike is lighter but not as strong.


----------



## kellyc (Apr 3, 2007)

chelboed said:


> The Pike and Yari both have 35mm stanchions. The Yari uses the chassis from the Lyrik. Thicker, stiffer, stronger tubing. More lateral and Axial rigidity.
> 
> Pike is lighter but not as strong.


Ok thanks for the info. That makes sense as the Yari looks stouter than the Pike. I've always assumed the Pike was 34.

Anybody have experience running the fork at 140 instead of 130 out of the gate?


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

I think NB is the only one who said they ran 140, everyone else went straight to 150. Imo, 150 is the way to go. 10mm is t really a lot for the effort it takes, why not just go 150 and be done?


----------



## RobertH (Oct 19, 2007)

I went straight to 150, did 25 miles on it so far so not much yet but feels really good.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Mikesee and I both ran 140, Mike started with 140, I transitioned from 130 to 140 to 150.

I like 150 best, but I also like a slacker HTA and I'm used to having more travel.

The Full STache has a low bb and low stack, so it benefts from a longer travel fork. The downside is higher SO.



kellyc said:


> Ok thanks for the info. That makes sense as the Yari looks stouter than the Pike. I've always assumed the Pike was 34.
> 
> Anybody have experience running the fork at 140 instead of 130 out of the gate?


----------



## kellyc (Apr 3, 2007)

steelerector said:


> I think NB is the only one who said they ran 140, everyone else went straight to 150. Imo, 150 is the way to go. 10mm is t really a lot for the effort it takes, why not just go 150 and be done?


Agreed. If I were starting with a bike that was complete and already had a 130, I'd feel confident enough to go 150 after riding it for a bit. Since I'm starting with the frame, I'm looking to play it a bit conservative and go with the 140.


----------



## kellyc (Apr 3, 2007)

Nurse Ben said:


> Mikesee and I both ran 140, Mike started with 140, I transitioned from 130 to 140 to 150.
> 
> I like 150 best, but I also like a slacker HTA and I'm used to having more travel.
> 
> The Full STache has a low bb and low stack, so it benefts from a longer travel fork. The downside is higher SO.


Ok good to know. I'm feeling like 140 is the sweet spot for me and where I'm riding, but, what's nice about the Yari is popping for a new 150 isn't going to break the bank.


----------



## 608566 (Mar 28, 2012)

Darn. There is a great deal on one around here. I rented one and had this problem. Was hoping carbon wheels with 32 spokes would solve it. Sounds like not gonna work. Really want a 29+ all arounder. Who builds a bike like this without sorting the flex? I mean this bike is not built around light weight concerns. Stupid. So much sand where I live. Hmm back to the drawing board. Thanks for the post.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I'd get a Lenz if I was still in the market for 3" tires. Walt makes a good frame too, he is full custom, problem is these two builders get as much for a frame/shock as you spend on a Full Stache.

The better choice would be for Trek to admit they built a rubber band, revise the frame, and sell a ton of them! Mike warned me, but I'm stubborn.



xophere said:


> Darn. There is a great deal on one around here. I rented one and had this problem. Was hoping carbon wheels with 32 spokes would solve it. Sounds like not gonna work. Really want a 29+ all arounder. Who builds a bike like this without sorting the flex? I mean this bike is not built around light weight concerns. Stupid. So much sand where I live. Hmm back to the drawing board. Thanks for the post.


----------



## jnroyal (Sep 25, 2008)

Ben and Xophere - about how much do you guys weigh? I rented a Full Stache last week on vacation and didn't have any noticeable flex/rub from the back end of the bike. I weigh around 170 out of the shower so probably 180-185 ready-to-ride.

I really loved the bike and would probably have one on order were it not for the PFBB and knock-block headset. Let's hope the second generation has a threaded BB and a curved down tube!


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

How much of a problem is this "rubber band" rear end? Should I worry about it? I weigh around 198lbs fully equipped and I like to ride aggressively to some degree.

I have Full Stache on pre-order for end of summer delivery but this talks about flex are very much worrying now


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I'm 200# nakid.

I honestly didn't notice the flex at first, then I got a little chain buzz, then as I pushed harded and got more vertical I started getting chainstay rub.

It's a great bike, maybe flex is less of an issue because you're lighter...

As for the Knockblock, it's not that big of a deal, not that I like it, but it doesn't hurt my riding.

As for threaded bb or press fit, I's not as big of a deal as osme folks think, I get no noise from mine. You can get a threaded bb for a press fit, only costs another $25-50.



jnroyal said:


> Ben and Xophere - about how much do you guys weigh? I rented a Full Stache last week on vacation and didn't have any noticeable flex/rub from the back end of the bike. I weigh around 170 out of the shower so probably 180-185 ready-to-ride.
> 
> I really loved the bike and would probably have one on order were it not for the PFBB and knock-block headset. Let's hope the second generation has a threaded BB and a curved down tube!


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> I'm 200# nakid.
> 
> I honestly didn't notice the flex at first, then I got a little chain buzz, then as I pushed harded and got more vertical I started getting chainstay rub.
> 
> ...


Maybe that's because you run 2.8" tires?


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

jnroyal said:


> I really loved the bike and would probably have one on order were it not for the PFBB and knock-block headset. Let's hope the second generation has a threaded BB and a curved down tube!


I really doubt Trek will have threaded BB in next year. Anyway, PF can be replaced, as far as I remember Wheels MFG produces various pressfit to threaded conversion BB.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Oh snap! I see your reasoning: Because everything other than the frame are stiffer, it makes the frame stiffness more pronounced 

When I swapped to narrower tires (2.6/2.8), the tire rub mostly disappeared except when I land akward off a drop.

All flexiness aside, it's a unique bike that has no peer. Take it with it's faults or break open the piggy bank and get a Lenz or Waltworks.

If I absolutely had to have 3" tires, it'd be a tough call; stay with the FS Stache or get a Lenz. I like Lenz quite a lot, but the Stache suspension rides better. Never rode a Waltworks, but Mikee likes it 



Mebaru said:


> Maybe that's because you run 2.8" tires?


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> All flexiness aside, it's a unique bike that has no peer. Take it with it's faults or broke open the piggy bank and get a Lenz or Waltworks.
> 
> If I absolutely had to have 3" tires, it'd be a tough call, stay with the FS Stache or get a Lenz. I like Lenz quite a lot, but the Stache suspension rides better. Never rode a Waltworks, but Mikee likes it


Very good point, I agree. I can't afford Lenz or Walt Works, especially when getting those here overseas and paying all taxes will add so much to the cost. Maybe some other day, when I am out of my misery


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

What's your misery?

You could also buy a frame and build one up.

I'll be selling mine once my Smash is ready, but overseas shipping is $$

I don't think anyone has been disappointed by the Full Stache. I'm "kinda" picky, there's no bike in the history of the world that satisfied all of my wants 

It's a nice package for the price.



Mebaru said:


> Very good point, I agree. I can't afford Lenz or Walt Works, especially when getting those here overseas and paying all taxes will add so much to the cost. Maybe some other day, when I am out of my misery


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

I'm about Ben's size and my PF92 on the Stache HT had been noise free, trouble free for a year now. I'd rather have threaded, but I'm fine with it.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> You could also buy a frame and build one up.


Buying a frame was my first idea. But for some reason Trek doesn't supply frames here yet. I was told they will be available late autumn.



Nurse Ben said:


> I'll be selling mine once my Smash is ready, but overseas shipping is $$


Well, I need 17.5" frame but yours is 19.5" as far as I remember.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

chelboed said:


> I'm about Ben's size and my PF92 on the Stache HT had been noise free, trouble free for a year now. I'd rather have threaded, but I'm fine with it.


Same here, trouble free year on Farley with PF121 and I ride a lot. PressFit BBs are often demonized a little bit more than they are in reality.


----------



## TheBaldBlur (Jan 13, 2014)

Mebaru said:


> Same here, trouble free year on Farley with PF121 and I ride a lot. PressFit BBs are often demonized a little bit more than they are in reality.


Maybe they've gotten better too. I know previous bikes that had PF BB's would always grind when standing to pedal, but my current bike doesn't.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Yup, size large.

The complete is not a bad deal, but tariffs, tax, and shipping would be more than for a frame.



Mebaru said:


> Buying a frame was my first idea. But for some reason Trek doesn't supply frames here yet. I was told they will be available late autumn.
> 
> Well, I need 17.5" frame but yours is 19.5" as far as I remember.


----------



## hubick (Aug 16, 2009)

I built my Full Stache frameset up w Enve M735's on Onyx hubs and 3" XR4's, 140mm Pike, Saints w 203/180mm rotors, Eagle GX w Twister, and thread-together PF BB shell.

I'm a 160lb XC rider and have noticed some flex in the back through hard corners, but certainly nothing which would have stopped me from buying the bike. I dunno if it was the 140mm, but it feels really slack coming from a Niner Rip 9 (and also much closer to the ground, glad I got alloy cranks!), so I immediately flipped the link from low to high, which makes it much more to my liking, though I need to do some adjusting, as I still feel like I'm leaning on the bars pretty hard. It rolls like a frickin' freight train and I certainly wouldn't spec lesser brakes than I did.

I had built 29+ wheels for my hardtail fatbike in the summer and fell in love - 29+ is great on a hardtail, as the tires take the bite off the terrain, but you get to keep all the efficiency of the frame - I felt like I was rolling through lightly rooted trails faster than ever. This? between the weight of the bike and losing the energy from both the suspension and the rolling resistance, it feels kinda like a triple whammy. Now, that said, despite being a lot of work, it's super fun to ride, and, since I'm not racing anymore, I absolutely love it as my day to day mountain bike. It's relaxing - you can pick and choose lines if you want to, or just yell screw it and roll right through the damn middle! I've also never had a bike which climbs this well - the suspension keeps those giant gnarly XR4's glued to the ground and I feel like there's almost nothing out there which could do a better job on technical ascents (as long as you have the muscle). So, in the end, I guess I would say it is what it is, and, given the lack of alternatives, I'm really happy Trek took a chance and made this.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Good review... I'm jealous


----------



## CRAZY FRED (May 31, 2006)

I saw this bike at the shop when I bought my Stache 7 a few weeks ago and it was definitely a serious bike but between all this flex talk and the hideous paint on the swing arm it's not working for me. I understand there can definitely be first generation bike bugs to work out and am quite sure Trek can and will do just that.


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

The question I have is a carbon rear wheel (say a Bontrager Line 40 Pro) or a stiffer wheel that what comes stock going to make a noticeable difference? I’ve had the full stache for a couple of months now and this is my first full sus. I’m coming off a ROS 9, which I rode for 5 years and broke. I go through cheap hubs so I’m waiting for the stock hub to break. I’m a six footer and 190ish geared up. Love the bike so far but do notice the soft rear end. Just curious if I would notice an improvement with a stiffer rear wheel? Mikesee, since you’ve ridden the bike and are an professional wheel builder I would love to hear your thoughts.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

71 10-7 said:


> Love the bike so far but do notice the soft rear end. Just curious if I would notice an improvement with a stiffer rear wheel? Mikesee, since you've ridden the bike and are an professional wheel builder I would love to hear your thoughts.


Would need to know what your current wheel specifics are, as well as which tire, run at what pressure, to be able to guess at whether what you're feeling is wheel or frame related. And it'd be just that -- a guess. My pre-guess is that in this case you're noticing the frame, not the wheel. But I could be wrong.


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

Stock Düroc 40, XR2 currently but same feeling when the XR4 was mounted. 14 to 16 psi. I do believe this is frame related per your guess. Other reviews have mentioned switching to a stiffer carbon wheel and that has helped but this doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. I appreciate any feedback!


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

71 10-7 said:


> The question I have is a carbon rear wheel (say a Bontrager Line 40 Pro) or a stiffer wheel that what comes stock going to make a noticeable difference? I've had the full stache for a couple of months now and this is my first full sus. I'm coming off a ROS 9, which I rode for 5 years and broke. I go through cheap hubs so I'm waiting for the stock hub to break. I'm a six footer and 190ish geared up. Love the bike so far but do notice the soft rear end. Just curious if I would notice an improvement with a stiffer rear wheel? Mikesee, since you've ridden the bike and are an professional wheel builder I would love to hear your thoughts.


I´m also on 40 mm carbon rims. The little flex in the back is still noticeable. So I also think that it comes from the construction of the back. I long ago have getting used to this little bit of movement in the back. I doesn´t bother me at all an it has no negative influence on my riding or the capabilities of the bike. This little bit of flex should not be overvalued!

In the meantime I have changed from the Shimano XT breaks to the Magura MT7 breaks. The yellow color on the break levers and the rings of the pistons matches very well with the green in the back. Also, Í was able to purchase one of the last available examples of a SQ-Lab 611 saddle in the limited Tibor Simai edition, that has the same yellow like the breaks. Now the bike is perfect!


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

I hear you on the flex, it doesn’t seem to make a huge difference and by the time I notice it I’m through the terrain that caused it. No doubt this bike is under braked and this is high on the priority list for upgrades. I recently cleaned the pads and rotor on the front then completed the bed in per sram procedure, this has helped but I would still like to see more power. Thinking about saints or the 4 pot xt’s for the front.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Geniusbiker said:


> In the meantime I have changed from the Shimano XT breaks to the Magura MT7 breaks. The yellow color on the break levers and the rings of the pistons matches very well with the green in the back. Also, Í was able to purchase one of the last available examples of a SQ-Lab 611 saddle in the limited Tibor Simai edition, that has the same yellow like the breaks. Now the bike is perfect!


You seem to be very serious about the colors  That SQ Lab carbon Tibor Simai saddle isn't cheap to say the least...


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Mebaru said:


> You seem to be very serious about the colors  That SQ Lab carbon Tibor Simai saddle isn't cheap to say the least...


But worth the money!


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Here are some pics...


----------



## ethierjung (May 30, 2017)

71 10-7 said:


> The question I have is a carbon rear wheel (say a Bontrager Line 40 Pro) or a stiffer wheel that what comes stock going to make a noticeable difference? I've had the full stache for a couple of months now and this is my first full sus. I'm coming off a ROS 9, which I rode for 5 years and broke. I go through cheap hubs so I'm waiting for the stock hub to break. I'm a six footer and 190ish geared up. Love the bike so far but do notice the soft rear end. Just curious if I would notice an improvement with a stiffer rear wheel? Mikesee, since you've ridden the bike and are an professional wheel builder I would love to hear your thoughts.


I have the Line Pro 40 rims and currently just over 200 lbs, I don't feel the flex too much but I do have the tire hit the chain if I am on one of the first four cogs of the cassette.


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

Thx for the info!


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

71 10-7 said:


> The question I have is a carbon rear wheel (say a Bontrager Line 40 Pro) or a stiffer wheel that what comes stock going to make a noticeable difference? I've had the full stache for a couple of months now and this is my first full sus. I'm coming off a ROS 9, which I rode for 5 years and broke. I go through cheap hubs so I'm waiting for the stock hub to break. I'm a six footer and 190ish geared up. Love the bike so far but do notice the soft rear end. Just curious if I would notice an improvement with a stiffer rear wheel? Mikesee, since you've ridden the bike and are an professional wheel builder I would love to hear your thoughts.


I don't see how a stiffer rear wheel can solve frame flex.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Kirkerik said:


> How about the Farley EX? Sure it would be stiffer w the wider hubs and fits 4.0 and 29+!


The Farley EX was super fun with 27.5 x 4" tires. No frame flex detected, ever.

But 29 x 3" tires put the static BB height at ~14.5".

I *really* like high BB's, and even I thought that felt high.


----------



## v33sonata (Jun 30, 2016)

Hey guys can I get some input on this link. I really loved this bike but want some input on sounds and issues owners have been having. Im ready to pull the trigger.... But then this happened.............. Thanks. also im 270lbs 6 foot.

http://forums.mtbr.com/26-27-5-29-p...ns-has-riddent-stache-8-full-sus-1083861.html


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

v33sonata said:


> Hey guys can I get some input on this link. I really loved this bike but want some input on sounds and issues owners have been having. Im ready to pull the trigger.... But then this happened.............. Thanks. also im 270lbs 6 foot.
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/26-27-5-29-p...ns-has-riddent-stache-8-full-sus-1083861.html


Having my Full Stache 8 now in action since 3 months (riding it 3 to 4 times per week). No unusual sounds at all, no other issues.
Last Friday I was able to break my personal time record with it on my hometrail. Best bike I´ve ever ridden!


----------



## RobertH (Oct 19, 2007)

I've had mine since mid-May, haven't noticed any strange noises.

It grows on me more each time I ride it, took it along a lake shore today and had no problems tracking through mud and rolling on wet clay, the XR4 tires throw the mud off nicely.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

270#?

I'd steer away from this bike, you're heavy and this bike has flexibility issues.

Take a look at the Fuel EX, it'll take 2.6-2.8 tires, it's lighter, and it won't be a noodle.

Same suspension and geo, should feel similar.



v33sonata said:


> Hey guys can I get some input on this link. I really loved this bike but want some input on sounds and issues owners have been having. Im ready to pull the trigger.... But then this happened.............. Thanks. also im 270lbs 6 foot.
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/26-27-5-29-p...ns-has-riddent-stache-8-full-sus-1083861.html


----------



## v33sonata (Jun 30, 2016)

Nurse Ben said:


> 270#?
> 
> I'd steer away from this bike, you're heavy and this bike has flexibility issues.
> 
> ...


Thanks,

I did ride the Fuel ex as well. I got some noises but that bike was a demo bike. Dint know the stache had flex issues. Thanks for the heads up.


----------



## Turd (Jul 21, 2005)

Nurse Ben said:


> 270#?
> 
> Take a look at the Fuel EX, it�ll take 2.6-2.8 tires, it�s lighter, and it won�t be a noodle.
> 
> Same suspension and geo, should feel similar.


*2.6-2.8* Is that the range for the rear or 2.6 rear and 2.8 front? (Fox Rhythm 34 Float,
on the comparable priced models)


----------



## telejefe (Mar 28, 2007)

I have run a goma, mcfly, and rekon in the reAr of a 2017 fuel ex (Duroc 40 rims). The mcfly was tight, but worked - and put a few hundred miles on it in the rear. There is room to dish the wheel to make better fit. The rekon is 67mm and is good to go. Fork is also fine.

Not too much flex and I ride an xxl and am 225.


----------



## Shooter McGavin (Feb 14, 2007)

Geniusbiker said:


> Here are some pics...


Purdy...


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Shooter McGavin said:


> Purdy...


... well maintained (I would say)


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

https://mbaction.com/bike-review-trek-full-stache-8/


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Geniusbiker said:


> https://mbaction.com/bike-review-trek-full-stache-8/


Poorly crafted article. Reads more like a press-release with detailed overview of components rather than a review.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

It's official, my Large Full Stache is for sale.

All original equipment. Wheels, tires, cranks, and cockpit have fewer than twenty miles use. Dropper upgraded to 150mm by Trek. Fork extended to 150mm with the upgraded air shaft (very smooth).

Extras:
Three Stems (60, 50, 40)
Three airshafts (130 original, 140, 150 installed)

Conditions is very good, no frame damage, though the paint has some scratches; Trek didn't use a very durable paint on this bike. Fork has some scratched on the legs, stanchions are perfect. QR levers have some scratches. Drivetrain is unblemished.

I paid full price ($3699) plus tax and had to pick it up (8hr drive each way), which is kinda how it works with Trek as they don't sell online and they don't ship.

I'm asking 75% of retail, buyer pays shipping and fees, all parts included as listed. 

Serious inquiries only. Send me a PM with your phone # or email and I'll forward pics.

First dibs for folks reading this thread. I'll list the bike on Pinkbike this weekend.


----------



## Stroganof (Jan 28, 2006)

Well, that didn't last long in your stable. Dare I ask what is next?


----------



## Libikerdad (Nov 18, 2017)

Stroganof said:


> Well, that didn't last long in your stable. Dare I ask what is next?


Whatever it is I'm sure it will be the best thing since sliced bread, for about a month


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

Libikerdad said:


> Whatever it is I'm sure it will be the best thing since sliced bread, for about a month


The sickness is real! Lol


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

If you care so much about the choices I make, you could probably figure out what I’m riding by looking at my signature 

Isn’t the internet an amazing platform for anonymous people to post ugliness about others?


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Nurse Ben said:


> If you care so much about the choices I make, you could probably figure out what I'm riding by looking at my signature
> 
> Isn't the internet an amazing platform for anonymous people to post ugliness about others?


Please sell me the Extra-Medium Smash in a month. I asked first. :thumbsup:


----------



## Stroganof (Jan 28, 2006)

Ben - no offense meant, I was just curious about what had your interest now - and was hoping you had thrown a leg over a Ripmo and some of the other new bikes and were willing to share.


----------



## CRAZY FRED (May 31, 2006)

Libikerdad said:


> Whatever it is I'm sure it will be the best thing since sliced bread, for about a month


Lol,I used to suffer from this..


----------



## CRAZY FRED (May 31, 2006)

Nurse Ben said:


> If you care so much about the choices I make, you could probably figure out what I'm riding by looking at my signature
> 
> Isn't the internet an amazing platform for anonymous people to post ugliness about others?


Buy what you want,ride what you want and sell what you don't want..No shade from me just keep riding..


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Ain't happening and you know it. GG has it going on.

Don't you have a Pedalhead and a Trailpistol already?

Damn do I love that Pedalhead!

The Smash is almost open for business, had to get out this morning before the smoke got bad, so the PH got love while the Smash waited for brakes and drivetrain.

Tomorrow it's all coil, all the day!



vikb said:


> Please sell me the Extra-Medium Smash in a month. I asked first. :thumbsup:


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Nurse Ben said:


> Don't you have a Pedalhead and a Trailpistol already?


Nope. I only have one GG bike. No PH or TP in the garage sadly.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

That'd be a tough call, the Pedalhead is beyond great, it'd easily be an only bike if it weren't for those big boulders that get in my way 



vikb said:


> Nope. I only have one GG bike. No PH or TP in the garage sadly.


----------



## Briareos (Aug 2, 2011)

hey guys, just got a full stache for my wife, and will be putting on the line pro 40s to save her some weight. The line pros come with shimano drivers. Can I re-use the XD driver from the durocs when I switch her over to the line pros?


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Briareos said:


> hey guys, just got a full stache for my wife, and will be putting on the line pro 40s to save her some weight. The line pros come with shimano drivers. Can I re-use the XD driver from the durocs when I switch her over to the line pros?


Virtually guaranteed not to be compatible from the Ringle hub to the Bontrager.


----------



## Freddy_G (Jul 27, 2016)

Hey all!

The Full Stache has caught my interest for my new bike! In theory it sounds like a great match for me that couldn't care less about KOM's, I just want to ride my bike and have fun! Also I rarely catch air, prefer to stay on the ground =)

The area where I ride has lots and lots of rocks and roots and is "hilly" (meaning relativly short and punchy climbs and descents), not one long climb and then long downhill.

I qualify in the clyde category so this flexy backend worries me... But you guys that experience it, when does this happen? Is it while railing berms at high speed? Or does it happen at even slow/medium speeds? Or maybe more when landing after catching air?

I will need to change wheels to something with 32 spokes and clyde-approved hub the first I do in any case.

Thanks!


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Briareos said:


> hey guys, just got a full stache for my wife, and will be putting on the line pro 40s to save her some weight. The line pros come with shimano drivers. Can I re-use the XD driver from the durocs when I switch her over to the line pros?


I´m riding my Full Stache with a custom builded, just over 1600 gr wheel set with carbon rims. Mounted the XR4s front and back and was really surprised that the benefit of the much lighter wheels wasn´t like I had expected. Then I switched to the XR2 on the back wheel and the result was: wow, what a difference in rolling resistance and acceleration. 
What I just would like to say is that you might have the same weight saving with going tubeless and the XR2 on the back wheel.


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

185 geared up. Notice the rear flex the most taking banked corners hard. Jumps and drops I don’t notice any flex. 

Bike is playful and fun. Easy to loft the front end and hop.

KOM’s, maybe not on climbs but she’s a freight train down the straight chunk. Climbing traction is phenomenal though.

A proper set of wheels help a bit w the rear flex but not a total cure.


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

71 10-7 said:


> 185 geared up. Notice the rear flex the most taking banked corners hard. Jumps and drops I don't notice any flex.
> 
> Bike is playful and fun. Easy to loft the front end and hop.
> 
> ...


I´m 176 and agree with that. 
And as soon as you have adjusted to that little bit of movement in the back it does not bother you at all. That little bit of flex is in my opinion no reason to not buy the Full Stache! The bike has so many other advantages that I do not care about sometimes noticing the back.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

What he said.

Flex is not a reason to avoid it, like all bikes, the Full Stache has it's pros and cons.

It's a fun bike for sure.



71 10-7 said:


> 185 geared up. Notice the rear flex the most taking banked corners hard. Jumps and drops I don't notice any flex.
> 
> Bike is playful and fun. Easy to loft the front end and hop.
> 
> ...


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

I´m so happy with this bike!


----------



## CRAZY FRED (May 31, 2006)

Geniusbiker said:


> I´m so happy with this bike!


Good for you. CF.


----------



## SteveJfromtheSwitch (Feb 8, 2012)

hi folks, new FS owner here. read most of this thread and yep also noticed the flex, but i'm ok with that, not a hard core rider. apart from weight any concerns about the stock rims/hubs? I mean 28 Hole rang a few alarm bells with me.
but in real life, anyone had any durability issues?

cheers
Steve


----------



## Briareos (Aug 2, 2011)

mikesee said:


> Virtually guaranteed not to be compatible from the Ringle hub to the Bontrager.


you were right, completely different...


----------



## 608566 (Mar 28, 2012)

That would be true but grinding the wheel against chain or chain stay is not really a good thing. I mean just in my opinion. I would have bought the bike otherwise. I found it unridable like having too big a tire on a frame.


----------



## 608566 (Mar 28, 2012)

I just put 2.6 on my sentinal in the back. Clearance is ok on the seat stay bridge. Will run a Dirt Wizard in the front which is basically a 2.8. Right now it has a assegai 2.5. Thinking 2.8 front on a i35 and 2.6 back on same.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

My Full Stache has been sold.

Thanks for all the input on my sale


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

Checking in on the Full Stacie experiment.. I’m about 300 miles in, with a lot of bike park laps in, and I cannot for the life of me get the flex out of the rear that you guys are describing. And I’m about 215# geared up. I’m pushing this thing as hard as I can, which to be sure isn’t KOM speeds, but not TOO far off the pace, and I have yet to get chain or tire rub from the rear, just a lot of cuts, bumps, and a dislocated collarbone lol. 

For what it’s worth, this bike is simply a blast to ride. Whether it’s at the bike park or on the local trails, it’s a ton of fun. And it holds up. I’ve taken a few nasty spills, with no damage to the bike. 

I buy bikes for the long haul, and I’m sure this bike will keep me happy to the next few years.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

steelerector said:


> Checking in on the Full Stacie experiment.. I'm about 300 miles in, with a lot of bike park laps in, and I cannot for the life of me get the flex out of the rear that you guys are describing. And I'm about 215# geared up. I'm pushing this thing as hard as I can, which to be sure isn't KOM speeds, but not TOO far off the pace, and I have yet to get chain or tire rub from the rear, just a lot of cuts, bumps, and a dislocated collarbone lol.
> 
> For what it's worth, this bike is simply a blast to ride. Whether it's at the bike park or on the local trails, it's a ton of fun. And it holds up. I've taken a few nasty spills, with no damage to the bike.
> 
> I buy bikes for the long haul, and I'm sure this bike will keep me happy to the next few years.


Perhaps some samples are worse than others. I wouldn't buy a used one that was described by the seller as a "rubber band" though!


----------



## OverTheHills (Aug 13, 2018)

Lol, I was thinking the same thing. I'm not too far from the one for sale up on Pinkbike and this bike is on my shortlist, but if some are lemons and others aren't then I would rather take my chances with the LBS


----------



## Libikerdad (Nov 18, 2017)

OverTheHills said:


> Lol, I was thinking the same thing. I'm not too far from the one for sale up on Pinkbike and this bike is on my shortlist, but if some are lemons and others aren't then I would rather take my chances with the LBS


In my opinion a bike needs to be discounted at least 30 to 40 percent for me to consider used, in this specific case I would much rather pay the 400 bucks more for new to have the peace of mind of a warranty. Also I have never paid the actual msrp on a new bike either, but I have multiple bike shops in my area that are all competing for business


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

Libikerdad said:


> In my opinion a bike needs to be discounted at least 30 to 40 percent for me to consider used, in this specific case I would much rather pay the 400 bucks more for new to have the peace of mind of a warranty. Also I have never paid the actual msrp on a new bike either, but I have multiple bike shops in my area that are all competing for business


Some people think just because they touched it, that it is worth more than full retail!


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

40% off for a used bike? 

Wow, sounds like you're used to buying Motobecanes.

Price difference as it sits is closer to $800 plus extras, so 20% off on a bike that won't get discounted.

It's a fair price, you're just jealous cuz your wife won't let you buy a bike


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

I am happy my wife keeps my spending in check!


----------



## OverTheHills (Aug 13, 2018)

My wife was the opposite. Wanted me to just go ahead and buy one so that it would put my endless researching to rest! And for what it's worth, I think the one up on Pinbike is at a very fair price, but my time is too limited to justify a cross-state drive for the savings.
Demo'd the Orbea Rallon and Ibis Ripmo, tested the FS in a maintenance deprived parking lot with a few steps, cracks, etc. Bought the FS (yesterday) because it was fun, and the most different than my current bike, and in many ways I think that was what I was craving. Had a ton of fun with it out at the aptly named Rockville Hills Regional Park yesterday. It was great at tooling around the skate park like steep granite on the Vortex and Unknown trails, and rough housing over the chunk they call the Rockgarden Trail. I'm more of a tooling around/TTF rider than speed demon, so I figured the Full Stache would be a fit for me. But despite that I found that it was the downhill runs where this bike was the most surprisingly fun. Big tires are awesome 
Can't wait to take it to Joaquin Miller soon! That's my closest and typical go-to park.



richwolf said:


> I am happy my wife keeps my spending in check!


----------



## Libikerdad (Nov 18, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> 40% off for a used bike?
> 
> Wow, sounds like you're used to buying Motobecanes.
> 
> ...


Actually my wife does let me buy bikes. I have a 2017 stache 7 upgraded with carbon bars and line pro 40's that I bought new and upgraded, (got the bike for about 15% off msrp and the rims for about %30 off. ) I also have a 2018 ibis mojo 3 that is pretty decked out (carbon bars, rims, magura breaks ect) again didn't pay full price and bought new. So not sure what your talking about. Btw there is a seller on eBay selling the same bike as you with the line pro carbon rims for only a little more than you are 
asking which is a much better deal imo


----------



## SteveJfromtheSwitch (Feb 8, 2012)

SteveJfromtheSwitch said:


> hi folks, new FS owner here. read most of this thread and yep also noticed the flex, but i'm ok with that, not a hard core rider. apart from weight any concerns about the stock rims/hubs? I mean 28 Hole rang a few alarm bells with me.
> but in real life, anyone had any durability issues?
> 
> cheers
> Steve


following up on my own question, i also note a few people putting the carbon line pro 40's, but these are also 28hole. wouldn't a 32 hole (even in alloy) be a stiffer option?


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

Not for nothing, the critical aspect of selling a used bike is, well, value.

Most rational adults are going to weigh cost savings vs potential issues with no warranty. For me, I’m looking at a 30% to 40% discount on a used bike, depending on the bike, of course. Anything less, I’m more inclined to just buy new.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Blatant said:


> Not for nothing, the critical aspect of selling a used bike is, well, value.
> 
> Most rational adults are going to weigh cost savings vs potential issues with no warranty. For me, I'm looking at a 30% to 40% discount on a used bike, depending on the bike, of course. Anything less, I'm more inclined to just buy new.


This.

I'd never buy a used, no-warranty bike for more than 70% of MSRP.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

I'm less inclined to buy any complete bike new because there's way to much that I'd have to change to make it mine.

I was walking through the bike shop a couple weeks ago, squeezing the brake levers. Every Guide brake lever I squeezed felt like jello compared to what I'm accustomed to. House brand handlebars? No way, man. Can't do it. A Bontrager saddle? Yeah right. Junk hubs connected to pinned Durocs via straight gauge spokes? Nope. It isn't a Duroc "wheelset"... Just a cheaper OEM pinned version of a welded Duroc with other crap laced up.

Likely the only way I'd buy another complete would be at a huge used discount because half that factory build is going on eBay.

If you know what works best for you, ground-up fresh build is the only way to fly.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

You guys really need a new hobby, razzing me and trying to hurt my sale because I piss you off is just low class. 

I’m done with this thread, it’s jumped the shark pages ago.

If anyone wants to inquire about the Full Stache I have for sale or they just have questions for me about the Full Stache, I’ll happily interact by PM.

Peace out.


----------



## Libikerdad (Nov 18, 2017)

chelboed said:


> I'm less inclined to buy any complete bike new because there's way to much that I'd have to change to make it mine.
> 
> I was walking through the bike shop a couple weeks ago, squeezing the brake levers. Every Guide brake lever I squeezed felt like jello compared to what I'm accustomed to. House brand handlebars? No way, man. Can't do it. A Bontrager saddle? Yeah right. Junk hubs connected to pinned Durocs via straight gauge spokes? Nope. It isn't a Duroc "wheelset"... Just a cheaper OEM pinned version of a welded Duroc with other crap laced up.
> 
> ...


I agree with you on this, however some bike stores (I know Jenson does this for a fact, because I did it with my mojo 3) will allow you to change component specs on a bike at a big discount. When I was ordering my mojo 3 I went with a nx build but upgraded the wheels, bars, grips, brakes (went with maguras) cassette, shifter, rear shock, and tires.  All for less than 5 grand which is a lot less than it would've cost to build from the frame up. Heck just the frame, wheels, and brakes would've cost me what I paid for the complete


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

So, if this thread "jumped the shark" pages ago, who do you think represents Fonzie?


----------



## OverTheHills (Aug 13, 2018)




----------



## cka3o4nuk (Jul 17, 2013)

ppl does anybody strugle from catching rear wheel when hang back on big gradient?
short chainstay and big wheels...
just curios because on fat with 4.9 i did it very often 780 (overal diameter)
on 27.5 3.25 much less (745 overal diameter)


----------



## Kyle201 (Jun 24, 2011)

I would love to try some bigger wheels, but that's also my major concern.... the wheel being too close when getting low over the back. Maybe you just adapt? I ride some really steep terrain, where even my 26+ can buzz me sometimes... but I don't know if I want to go much bigger in the rear for this reason. Need to try to know...


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

I’ve definitely shaved my shorts a few times on the back tire, but nothing that would be a deal killer for me... 

I’ve been riding 29s for almost 10 years now, though, so I’m kinda used to it.


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

Kyle201 said:


> I would love to try some bigger wheels, but that's also my major concern.... the wheel being too close when getting low over the back. Maybe you just adapt? I ride some really steep terrain, where even my 26+ can buzz me sometimes... but I don't know if I want to go much bigger in the rear for this reason. Need to try to know...


I've had a Stache (hardtail) for two summers now and have been thinking about going to a Roscoe for this (and other) reasons. The Stache is great at what it does, but every now and then i want something slightly smaller. I'd love to hear opinions from those who've ridden (or preferably owned) both Stache and Roscoe.


----------



## Kyle201 (Jun 24, 2011)

29+ front and 650+/26+ rear, might be a fun option for steeper terrain?


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

steelerector said:


> I've definitely shaved my shorts a few times on the back tire, but nothing that would be a deal killer for me...
> 
> I've been riding 29s for almost 10 years now, though, so I'm kinda used to it.











How stinkin' steep are y'all rolling. I do really steep Boulder-rollers and sometimes don't even drop a saddle...let alone get that low.


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

chelboed said:


> View attachment 1213641
> 
> 
> How stinkin' steep are y'all rolling. I do really steep Boulder-rollers and sometimes don't even drop a saddle...let alone get that low.


If I tried that move in the saddle, it would surely end badly. I suppose I'm top-heavy, and have to move around more as such. Or I'm doing it wrong, I don't know.. I'm no expert...


----------



## vikb (Sep 7, 2008)

Kyle201 said:


> I would love to try some bigger wheels, but that's also my major concern.... the wheel being too close when getting low over the back. Maybe you just adapt?


If you have been riding for decades like some of us you learned your skills on very short [comparatively] bikes without droppers. So "going off" the back was essential for survival. Modern bikes are much longer and we have droppers. You should not be going off the back on a modern bike. You should lower the saddle and lower yourself.

If you try and ride a long modern bike from the back wheel you won't be able to weight the front wheel properly and you'll have issue with traction up there. Plus you just don't need to. These bikes are so long that they are not the endo machines of our past.

When I got my 29er I hit the rear tire on some drops and that was annoying. It made me realise I was moving too far back. So I just changed that and it has been fine ever since. I doubt you'll have a problem adapting.


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

I noticed the tire buzz issue right away a few times. Been riding the full stache for a few months now and haven’t had the issue. Just spent a few days in Bentonville w a shuttle day at Leatherwood and no buzz. Like everything else, I think I’ve just learned to adapt. I was on the same bike for almost 5 years so muscle memory was well established.


----------



## OverTheHills (Aug 13, 2018)

71 10-7 said:


> I noticed the tire buzz issue right away a few times. Been riding the full stache for a few months now and haven't had the issue. Just spent a few days in Bentonville w a shuttle day at Leatherwood and no buzz. Like everything else, I think I've just learned to adapt. I was on the same bike for almost 5 years so muscle memory was well established.


I've also been riding for decades, and buzzed my butt on a short steep drop with the Full Stache. But apparently I'm not that old of a dog because I did immediately adapt and it didn't happen again. But another question: I know the Full Stache isn't about going to the parks to get big air. Like my 50+ year old body, that's just something it shouldn't be doing. But, what are folks finding it can get away with? I've gotten comfortable doing 2' drops and jumps. On a brave day, I might hit a 3' drop. On a brave and stupid day, I'd possibly consider 4'. Anyone doing anything like that on this bike? I just discovered Exchequer MTB Park on YouTube and it would be a doable day trip from where I live. Foolish thoughts are now in my head...


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Heck dude, at 42Y.O. and 220#, I'd do that on a Stache hardtail. I think you're fine.


----------



## huckleberry hound (Feb 27, 2015)

chelboed said:


> Heck dude, at 42Y.O. and 220#, I'd do that on a Stache hardtail. I think you're fine.


I'm 55y.o. and 245# with gear. I would do that on my Stache Hardtail. He should definitely be fine.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

huckleberry hound said:


> I'm 55y.o. and 245# with gear. I would do that on my Stache Hardtail. He should definitely be fine.


LOLZ!! It's official...we need footage. Start with the 2-footer and move up. Let us know how it goes.


----------



## CRAZY FRED (May 31, 2006)

OverTheHills said:


> I've also been riding for decades, and buzzed my butt on a short steep drop with the Full Stache. But apparently I'm not that old of a dog because I did immediately adapt and it didn't happen again. But another question: I know the Full Stache isn't about going to the parks to get big air. Like my 50+ year old body, that's just something it shouldn't be doing. But, what are folks finding it can get away with? I've gotten comfortable doing 2' drops and jumps. On a brave day, I might hit a 3' drop. On a brave and stupid day, I'd possibly consider 4'. Anyone doing anything like that on this bike? I just discovered Exchequer MTB Park on YouTube and it would be a doable day trip from where I live. Foolish thoughts are now in my head...


LMFAO, great stuff brother ride on! CF.


----------



## CRAZY FRED (May 31, 2006)

chelboed said:


> Heck dude, at 42Y.O. and 220#, I'd do that on a Stache hardtail. I think you're fine.


Big difference between 42 and 50+, just sayen .CF


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Definitely. How are you even breathing? Do your fingers get too tired to sign your name, so you end your posts with CF?

At least you don't have to buy bike shorts anymore. The Depends are padding enough for ya.

No need for eye protection at that age. You can't see anything anyways.

Swapped out the CamelBak bladder for a portable oxygen tank?

Electric assist would be in your future, but you're not a young enough whipper snapper to figure out how to turn this daggum thing on!?





I kid. Thanks for the heads up Fred. I'll do a drop for you on my fifty one'st birthday.




My post was merely saying I'm not a little rubber-people Red Bull shooting, Monster Energy snorting teen...and I'm on an inferior bike for drops, given the rear wheel destruction that can occur on hardtail...yet I encourage the guy to go for it.


Maybe you couldn't quite see between the lines because you thought it was a bragging statement. Trust me, I wouldn't brag about any drops under 4 feet, hehehe.

There's plenty more to be had round here than that.




Game on!


----------



## huckleberry hound (Feb 27, 2015)

CRAZY FRED said:


> Big difference between 42 and 50+, just sayen .CF


I'm 55. I still do it.


----------



## CRAZY FRED (May 31, 2006)

chelboed said:


> Definitely. How are you even breathing? Do your fingers get too tired to sign your name, so you end your posts with CF?
> 
> At least you don't have to buy bike shorts anymore. The Depends are padding enough for ya.
> 
> ...


Tell you what sweetheart if you and your "inferior hardtail" ever wanna make your way here to Massachusetts look me up. I would only suggest two things, do your homework on me first and pack a big lunch... CRAZY FRED..


----------



## CRAZY FRED (May 31, 2006)

huckleberry hound said:


> I'm 55. I still do it.


Good for you as do I but that wasn't my point...Ride on.


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

cka3o4nuk said:


> ppl does anybody strugle from catching rear wheel when hang back on big gradient?
> short chainstay and big wheels...
> just curios because on fat with 4.9 i did it very often 780 (overal diameter)
> on 27.5 3.25 much less (745 overal diameter)


A year ago i was getting low behind my saddle(no dropper) than i read it is more about getting low than way back.
Now i just get my whole body low and it seems to work fine, even elbows.
Maybe you can search youtube for a video.
My 29 is OK, so is my fatbike with 4.8 studded tires.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

CRAZY FRED said:


> Tell you what sweetheart if you and your "inferior hardtail" ever wanna make your way here to Massachusetts look me up. I would only suggest two things, do your homework on me first and pack a big lunch... CRAZY FRED..


Well I ride solo here. I wouldn't drive half way across the country just to have to hang on to someone else back wheel. And I don't ride long enough to pack a lunch. I stopped puffing up my chest and boasting about my riding ability years ago. I found out...nobody really cared so the E-threat from behind the keyboard sounded pretty desperate and childish.

Now if you'd like, I can Google you up another forum where there's probably plenty of 55y.o. men wearing Lycra that call each other sweetheart. They probably don't ride bikes, but I'm sure they'd pack your lunch.

I really was just playfully razzing you about the age comments.

And I'm married...to a woman...so I'm not your sweetheart...though I think I probably am a sweetheart... so if it makes you feel more manly, I'll take it.


----------



## CRAZY FRED (May 31, 2006)

chelboed said:


> Well I ride solo here. I wouldn't drive half way across the country just to have to hang on to someone else back wheel. And I don't ride long enough to pack a lunch. I stopped puffing up my chest and boasting about my riding ability years ago. I found out...nobody really cared so the E-threat from behind the keyboard sounded pretty desperate and childish.
> 
> Now if you'd like, I can Google you up another forum where there's probably plenty of 55y.o. men wearing Lycra that call each other sweetheart. They probably don't ride bikes, but I'm sure they'd pack your lunch.
> 
> ...


Glad to hear the puffing your chest days are behind you,saying you would never brag about a 4 foot drop sure sounded like bragging/chest puffing to me. Also very disrespectful to those who do or would brag about a 4 foot drop..I called you sweetheart not because I am a gay man I called you that instead of bit#h like I wanted. But you running with that and most likely offending **** sexuals shows me(and I'm sure many others) your more of a bit#h than I thought..Saying a hardtail is an inferior bike for drops because of the given rear wheel destruction also tells me alot about you..You clearly know nothing about the skill set it takes to ride a hardtail ( or the understanding of a great wheel set) Glad to hear your married to a woman ( an extremely unsatisfied woman I'm sure) as I'm sure riding solo is not the only thing you do alone..This is not and was not ever a "E-threat" thing as I maybe alot of things but a cell worrior I am not ( I'm guessing you won't understand that reference) I apologise to all those that are on and reading this thread for it's intended use (the new Stache fully) and I'm pretty certain this clown will respond with more bashing and chest puffing but I am completely done and over this clown the second I hit reply..But definitely not done with this thread and the interest of this bike .Good day gentleman,ride on..CF.


----------



## pOrk (Jan 16, 2015)




----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

pOrk said:


> View attachment 1214305


Yeah, it sure did. And I can't say that I helped one iota, lol. Sorry to the community bout that one.

Back to bikes.


----------



## FoShizzle (Jan 18, 2004)

CRAZY FRED said:


> Tell you what sweetheart if you and your "inferior hardtail" ever wanna make your way here to Massachusetts look me up. I would only suggest two things, do your homework on me first and pack a big lunch... CRAZY FRED..


not cool man...Fred, I always thought I was your sweetheart? you are a tease


----------



## OverTheHills (Aug 13, 2018)

Sounds like the answer to my question is yes, you can do 4' drops on a Full Stache. 
But be careful because it might cause everyone around you to get in an argument.

Peace


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

I no longer think I'm rad enough for a full stache. My drops are inadequate. Whadda pissa.


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

It seems i might still be alive.
Gravity works on me.
I can drop on a bike.
I can drop off a bike.
I can drop without a bike.
My new coach will try to make me drop off my walker next month !


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

MrIcky said:


> I no longer think I'm rad enough for a full stache. My drops are inadequate. Whadda pissa.


Admission is the first step on the road to recovery, hehehe.


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

She handles 6 foot drops just fine.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Does Full Stache frame has mounts for chainguide? Like ISCG05 or S3-Etype mount? From photos seems not.


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

Mine doesn't.


----------



## AK Clyde (Sep 10, 2018)

*Full Stache Camping with BOB Ibex*

Hey MTBR, first post here. (Clyde 260lb 6'4") I got my Large Full Stache in June (Trek Anchorage accidently had one, but no XL)(I asked if I could test ride for a day, they laughed, I bought it), this is pretty much the bike I've been looking for a decade. Ive got about 300 miles on it now, mostly XC, rough single track. Set it up with a Robert Axle project axle and a BOB Ibex (suspension) trailer. Laborday weekend I loaded the trailer with 60lbs and a 20LB backpack on me and went camping on the Resurrection Trail out of Hope AK. It's a very rooty trail and many of the riders I saw (some bike packers some unloaded through riders) out there over the weekend looked a little beat up from the trail conditions. My girlfriend (riding a 2018 stumjumper carbon 27.5x3 + BOB Yak) and I were tired, but not beat up by the trail as I have been in past years. 
So, yeah, I'm pushing the bike beyond it's design specifications, but it made the trip way more pleasurable because of the 29x3 (tubeless 20psi) and 130mm travel full suspension. (glad to read here the fork can be setup for 150mm) The BOB Ibex does a great job calming the roots and staying in line. Does it flex the rear end? Sure. But I'll take it out there again. It's most obvious moving slow and technically as the trailers momentum can push the bike around because of the flex. I just had to be a bit smoother in my reactions. In my normal riding I barely notice the flex, but I'm in the bottom 1/2 of the local single track strava leaderboards. 
I did break 3 spokes on the ride (unknown how, not accidents), drive side, all next to each other oriented the same direction (Under breaking/stopping load). But the tire still barely rubbed the frame. I did slow down riding the last 2 miles to the trail head after I heard the third spoke ping. I hadn't noticed the others break.

Other things I noticed
-Chain rub on tire in lowest gears when suspension and tire flex/deform Also chain gathers MUD off tire, not conducive to good shifting
-Dropper post too short at 120mm. Cable also stripped out of lever. I'll be soldering the end of the next cable wires together. First dropper post, LOVE it!!
-28 spoke wheels?. 32/36 spokes would be a nice factory option for Clydes and bike packers.
-low engagement freewheel. Very noticeable on a 29er. Hard to half pedal over obstacles. Might go ONYX as suggested by Mikesee
-could use more stopping power. Will upgrade 203 rotors.
-swap floro green accent for British racing green.
-The bike is REALLY fun, I Love it! Won't be selling it, but I might swap for an XL.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

AK Clyde said:


> -Chain rub on tire in lowest gears when suspension and tire flex/deform Also chain gathers MUD off tire, not conducive to good shifting


That's really disappointing. I read complaints about Full Stache chain rub and the major issue with it - when riding in mud it causes frequent chain drops...


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Mebaru said:


> That's really disappointing. I read complaints about Full Stache chain rub and the major issue with it - when riding in mud it causes frequent chain drops...


Cannot confirm this: I´ve never had any chain rub or chain drops in any conditions since I bought the bike end of April...


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

+1.. I've not had a single issue with chain drops in the mud.. and there's been PLENTY of mud this year on the east coast.. Case in point..


----------



## tradera (Apr 16, 2013)

Mebaru said:


> That's really disappointing. I read complaints about Full Stache chain rub and the major issue with it - when riding in mud it causes frequent chain drops...


My full stache didn't have chain rub until I swapped in my I9 hubs w/50mm Rabbit holes from my HT stache. A little offset adjustment with the spokes and its rolling with plenty of clearance on both sides even with the wider footprint.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

One more question - what is size of PM rear brake on Full Stache frame - 160mm or 180mm?


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

It comes w/ 180 rotors F/R.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

steelerector said:


> It comes w/ 180 rotors F/R.


Thanks. Without adapters?


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

With adaptors.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

steelerector said:


> With adaptors.


Dude, you really could give a full answer, if you own Full Stache 
I assume, if rear brake is mounted via adapter, frame rear PM is 160mm. But front 180mm rotor should be mounted without adapter because Pike fork has 180mm PM.


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

Mebaru said:


> Dude, you really could give a full answer, if you own Full Stache
> I assume, if rear brake is mounted via adapter, frame rear PM is 160mm. But front 180mm rotor should be mounted without adapter because Pike fork has 180mm PM.


I apologize, I missed that you were asking about the PM.. You may not like my answer much more than my previous, but hopefully you can extrapolate the info you're looking for.

When I upgraded the front rotor to a 200mm, I used this adaptor:
https://www.worldwidecyclery.com/pr...daptor-fits-200mm-front-and-180mm-rear-rotors

Both front and rear stock adapters are the same part, so I assume the PM is the same for both.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Finally, received my Full Stache this week. What a bike! Totally have met my expectations.

Put a new Bontrager Line Pro 40 2018 wheels on it. I read that there were a lot carbon failures with Line Pro 30 wheels. I really hope mine will stay strong.

My frame size is M. I tried pushing it really hard today but still can't experience a chain rub on smallest cogs. Maybe this is a plague of larger frames?

Stock Guire R brakes are depressing, will upgrade them next week.

Bontrager dropper lever is the ugliest of all I have seen to date.

I was impressed by rear suspension work and also how well bike pedals too. 

Bottom bracket is rather low even in mino link high position. I am considering a shorter cranks now. I can't imagine running this bike with 2.6 tires.


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

@ Mebaru

The wheel upgrade is a must. I had mikesee build a proper set of wheels (arc 40’s w DT 350’s) for mine and the perceived flex in the rear has all but disappeared. Size large.

What are you planning for brakes? Also, did you follow the sram bed in procedure? I didn’t at first but cleaned everything up and started the bed in process over, made a huge difference and the Guide R’s have been decent since.

I raised the front end up to 140, almost wished I would have gone 150. Anyway, my bb height is 345mm w the mino at the high position. Are you getting pedal strikes? I’m up to 245 psi in the shock to get 30% sag, which seems like a lot for a 185 pound geared up rider. I really like the way it feels and am riding higher in the travel and getting less pedal strikes.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

No flex, hmmmm, I had the same wheels built by Mike.

I think it's stretching the truth to promote this bike as having a stiff frame.

The truth is always the best policy.

Mike told me it was flexy, but I got one anyhow; and yeah it was flexy just like he said.

Clearly rider weight and use will give different results, but on the "noodle scale", the Full Stache is below average. It's the flexiest frame I've ever owned.

Not looking to start a flame war, I've said my piece.

In many respects the Full Stache is a great bike:

Good suspension
Good geo
Great color 

But the low B.B. and flexy rear triangle are a problem.

If Trek keeps this bike in their lineup, they need to fix those two problems.

I'd also ditch the knockblock, but that's a corporate issue



71 10-7 said:


> @ Mebaru
> 
> The wheel upgrade is a must. I had mikesee build a proper set of wheels (arc 40's w DT 350's) for mine and the perceived flex in the rear has all but disappeared. Size large.
> 
> ...


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

If you’re not trying to flame why pee all over a stoked rider’s new bike? I think you said your piece multiple times throughout this thread.


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

I’ll attempt to qualify my statement by mentioning this is my first full suspension bike. With the stock wheels I felt a lot of flex in the rear. Chain rub when working the rear hard, especially in the larger cogs. Occasional tire rub on the cs. This is all but gone w the new wheels. Obviously the design w the drive side elevated cs does not make for the stiffest rear end, but since I haven’t ridden any other fs bikes I don’t have anything to compare it to.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

71 10-7 said:


> @ Mebaru
> What are you planning for brakes? Also, did you follow the sram bed in procedure? I didn't at first but cleaned everything up and started the bed in process over, made a huge difference and the Guide R's have been decent since.
> 
> I raised the front end up to 140, almost wished I would have gone 150. Anyway, my bb height is 345mm w the mino at the high position. Are you getting pedal strikes? I'm up to 245 psi in the shock to get 30% sag, which seems like a lot for a 185 pound geared up rider. I really like the way it feels and am riding higher in the travel and getting less pedal strikes.


I have bed in brakes. Still think they are weak for rough descents for such large wheels. Will replace them either with Code RSC or Magura MT7 with 203/180 rotors.

Yes, I am getting too much pedal strikes for my liking. I am like 200 pounds with gear, running 220 psi rear / 95 front.

I will increase fork travel to 140/150mm and also will probably upgrade it. Maybe will get push industries acs3 or even will replace fork with manitou with IRT (mattoc or the new 37 stachions fork that they will release later this year).

The other upgrades I will do next: 780-800mm carbon handlebar (Chromag BZA 35mm raiser), shorter stem, shorter and more comfortable saddle (240-250mm long, probably WTB Koda).


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

Good choices on the brakes. I’ve been thinking about an upgrade and those two were in consideration along w the new XT’s/Saints. If your getting 30% sag at your weight I wonder if there is some shock pump disparity? Either way, I would put some more air in your shock aiming for 15mm of sag. A few mm can help w pedal strikes. Also bumping the fork travel up will help raise the bb. You’ll have a sweet ride w those upgrades!!!


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

Am i alone?
Why is a 4,000$ new bike so in need of upgrades???
I like a high BB.
Low BB is ****.
Not new geo.
Shitty geo.


----------



## 2old (Aug 31, 2015)

33red said:


> Am i alone?
> Why is a 4,000$ new bike so in need of upgrades???
> I like a high BB.
> Low BB is ****.
> ...


Agreed.....some people get to ride on some very well maintained trails. Not one root or rock more then 2mm high allowed on the trail. Shitty geo and low bb= me selling my 6Fattie.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

71 10-7 said:


> Good choices on the brakes. I've been thinking about an upgrade and those two were in consideration along w the new XT's/Saints. If your getting 30% sag at your weight I wonder if there is some shock pump disparity? Either way, I would put some more air in your shock aiming for 15mm of sag. A few mm can help w pedal strikes. Also bumping the fork travel up will help raise the bb. You'll have a sweet ride w those upgrades!!!


Aiming for 15mm sag? Try again. Terrible advice. If you have to aim for 15mm sag to avoid pedal strikes, you bought the wrong ride. 25-30 is quite normal.


----------



## huckleberry hound (Feb 27, 2015)

71 10-7 said:


> Good choices on the brakes. I've been thinking about an upgrade and those two were in consideration along w the new XT's/Saints. If your getting 30% sag at your weight I wonder if there is some shock pump disparity? Either way, I would put some more air in your shock aiming for 15mm of sag. A few mm can help w pedal strikes. Also bumping the fork travel up will help raise the bb. You'll have a sweet ride w those upgrades!!!


Just put some 165mm cranks on it and be done! It was one of the best purchases I've ever made for my Stache 7. No loss of power and I actually climb better with them.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

71 10-7 said:


> Good choices on the brakes. I've been thinking about an upgrade and those two were in consideration along w the new XT's/Saints. If your getting 30% sag at your weight I wonder if there is some shock pump disparity? Either way, I would put some more air in your shock aiming for 15mm of sag. A few mm can help w pedal strikes. Also bumping the fork travel up will help raise the bb. You'll have a sweet ride w those upgrades!!!


XT is meh, Saints are too heavy and lack modulation to my liking. I have 30% sag on shock and pretty much happy how it works. I probably will get a 165mm crankarms. The problem with low BB on this bike is that you supposed to roll over rough stuff with such large wheels and fat rubber but that's freaking hard because I get too much pedal strikes. Maybe I will get used to it.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

huckleberry hound said:


> Just put some 165mm cranks on it and be done! It was one of the best purchases I've ever made for my Stache 7. No loss of power and I actually climb better with them.


Yes, this seems to be the remedy to low BB. What cranks do you have?


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

15 mm is about 30% which is where your supposed to be at. 25 to 30mm is at/over 50% of the stroke.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

71 10-7 said:


> 15 mm is about 30% which is where your supposed to be at. 25 to 30mm is at over 50% of the stroke.


Not sure about mills. I have 30% sag with 220PSI for my 200lbs with gear. Which is also inline with recommendations from Trek suspension calculator. You seem to be much lighter and still have 30% with higher pressure in shock?


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

Yes


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

71 10-7 said:


> Yes


According to trek calculator you should get 30% with 210PSI. You should measure sag in firm position, by the way.


----------



## huckleberry hound (Feb 27, 2015)

Mebaru said:


> Yes, this seems to be the remedy to low BB. What cranks do you have?


I have XT M8000 but If I had Eagle with a Dub BB I would use SRAM GX Eagle DUB Boost 148 165mm. It can be purchased here.
https://www.worldwidecyclery.com/pr...65mm-direct-mount-32tx-sync-2-chainring-black


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

I measure the sag in the open position. Running 210 I bottom out on a 2 foot drop at the end of my driveway.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

71 10-7 said:


> I measure the sag in the open position. Running 210 I bottom out on a 2 foot drop at the end of my driveway.


Sag is usually measured in closed position. Maybe you land too much on rear wheel? I jumped today 2ft drops and never bottomed out.


----------



## 71 10-7 (Nov 8, 2004)

You should be measuring your sag in the full open position.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

71 10-7 said:


> You should be measuring your sag in the full open position.


Indeed.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

If holy smokes...I must have read this with one eye closed. I thought the sag-man typed 15% sag, lol... My bad! Party on, Wayne


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

Can anyone share a picture of a 17.5 (smalles frame available)? I am not sure what size I should choose. I am 177cm with rather short legs.
According to Trek recommendation, I am right at the end of the 17.5, but could possibly go with a 19.5.
From what I saw, the geometry is rather long (reach)...
My favorite ride is more CC, not really enduro. I am just a huge fan of 29x3...


----------



## PoshJosh (Mar 30, 2007)

Nurse Ben said:


> You guys really need a new hobby, razzing me and trying to hurt my sale because I piss you off is just low class.
> 
> I'm done with this thread, it's jumped the shark pages ago.
> 
> ...





Nurse Ben said:


> No flex, hmmmm, I had the same wheels built by Mike.
> 
> I think it's stretching the truth to promote this bike as having a stiff frame.
> 
> ...


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Mebaru said:


> Sag is usually measured in closed position.


No. Wide open.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Rubberduckxi said:


> Can anyone share a picture of a 17.5 (smalles frame available)? I am not sure what size I should choose. I am 177cm with rather short legs.
> According to Trek recommendation, I am right at the end of the 17.5, but could possibly go with a 19.5.
> From what I saw, the geometry is rather long (reach)...
> My favorite ride is more CC, not really enduro. I am just a huge fan of 29x3...


Not sure how picture will help? I am 176cm with regular legs, 17.5 frame fits me well, with a legal ~3cm clearance between groin and top tube when standing, I like the reach too. I haven't tried Full Stache with L(19.5) frame. Though, I tried Stache 18.5 frame and my balls where literally pressed to the top tube. I also own Farley 17.5 which fits me well but I want it to have a little bit longer reach.

Regarding CC and enduro - I think Full Stache is somewhere in-between. Trek defines Full Stache riders as: adventure seekers, backcountry purists and those who value capability over everything else. This pretty much describes the bike. For pure CC it's a bit on heavy side, suffers from low BB (you will get a lot of pedal strikes riding CC), riding uphill requires much more endurance, you won't be as fast as, say, on Top Fuel or Fuel Ex. For enduro - it lacks precision and agility, needs more travel.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

Sag is for wusses. BTW, front brake bargain replacement- Guide RE and use existing rotors. Bam, $135, done.


----------



## 2old (Aug 31, 2015)

MrIcky said:


> Sag is for wusses. BTW, front brake bargain replacement- Guide RE and use existing rotors. Bam, $135, done.


Lol....real men ride a Stache

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

Mebaru said:


> Not sure how picture will help? I am 176cm with regular legs, 17.5 frame fits me well, with a legal ~3cm clearance between groin and top tube when standing, I like the reach too. I haven't tried Full Stache with L(19.5) frame. Though, I tried Stache 18.5 frame and my balls where literally pressed to the top tube. I also own Farley 17.5 which fits me well but I want it to have a little bit longer reach.
> 
> Regarding CC and enduro - I think Full Stache is somewhere in-between. Trek defines Full Stache riders as: adventure seekers, backcountry purists and those who value capability over everything else. This pretty much describes the bike. For pure CC it's a bit on heavy side, suffers from low BB (you will get a lot of pedal strikes riding CC), riding uphill requires much more endurance, you won't be as fast as, say, on Top Fuel or Fuel Ex. For enduro - it lacks precision and agility, needs more travel.


Thx a lot for your answer! I am just really unsure with which size I might fit better. Stack is for 17.5 and 19.5 the same, but the reach is, compared to my Cannondale Bad Habit 1 in size M, very long. Might I ask what stem length you ride?
Well, this thread is suffering from not enough pics...

I think, this describtion is what I am looking for, a bit of everything usable, and, on 29+ wheels...

And by the way, I am interested in the frameset, it is always the best part, aside from riding of course, to search and choose parts :thumbsup:


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Rubberduckxi said:


> Thx a lot for your answer! I am just really unsure with which size I might fit better. Stack is for 17.5 and 19.5 the same, but the reach is, compared to my Cannondale Bad Habit 1 in size M, very long. Might I ask what stem length you ride?
> Well, this thread is suffering from not enough pics...
> 
> I think, this describtion is what I am looking for, a bit of everything usable, and, on 29+ wheels...
> ...


I think 19.5 reach is way too long for me. I have stock stem which is 60mm but I will replace it with shorter soon, 35 or 45 and also will get a wider handlebar.

My ride:


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

I will have so see if somewhere I can find a dealer who allows to do a short test ride... That reach seems to be in deed very long...

Other question: How is the clearance at the rear if I would run a 50mm rim with 3“ tyre? Any rubbing to be expected?


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Rubberduckxi said:


> Other question: How is the clearance at the rear if I would run a 50mm rim with 3" tyre? Any rubbing to be expected?


50mm rims should fit without issues, just giving the tire a more square profile. I believe, originally Stache hardtail was supplied with 50mm Duroc rims.


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Mebaru said:


> I have bed in brakes. Still think they are weak for rough descents for such large wheels. Will replace them either with Code RSC or Magura MT7 with 203/180 rotors.
> 
> Yes, I am getting too much pedal strikes for my liking. I am like 200 pounds with gear, running 220 psi rear / 95 front.
> 
> ...


My recommendation regarding the brakes:
Magura MT 7 
Not only because of their performance, but also because they look really fine on the Full Stache.

Btw: pedal strikes have never been an issue for me. I´m in the high position with 170 mm XX1 Eagle DUB cranks.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Geniusbiker said:


> My recommendation regarding the brakes:
> Magura MT 7
> Not only because of their performance, but also because they look really fine on the Full Stache.


Agreed, MT7 color accent looks great on Full Stache. My only concern about Magura brakes - they are made from plastic these days and when you crash they're easily destroyed.


----------



## steelerector (Apr 9, 2018)

FWIW, I was considering changing out the whole brake system, but decided to try jagwire semi-metallic pads first, and I feel like the brake system performs wholly better with better pads. No more sketchy fade on long, steep descents, modulation feels better, and I get better feedback through the lever. The lever force required is still higher than other systems, but at least I know it will stop when I need it to now. 

They get a little noisy in the wet, but otherwise I haven't noticed the excruciating noise usually associated with metallic pads.


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

I am wondering if a 29er Lefty Supermax 130mm would fit nicely. If I am right, then both 17.5 and 19.5 have the same headtube length, around 90mm, so a Lefty with 97mm bridge gap should fit... in theorie... but, I am a bit concerned about the minimum stem length that work with a Lefty, if its too short the handlebar might not fit...
The Knock-Block I might still be able to use, if I machine a dedicated spacer and adapt a Hope stem...

Your thoughts on my thoughts please...:skep:


----------



## Dirt Road (Feb 6, 2016)

My perspective this thread, trek put out a cool bike. Douchebags rode and owned said bike. If I didn’t plunk down on a 27.5+ full, I’d prolly stroll on in to lbs and take a look. Never rely on any perspective, especially on bikes. Wayyy too personal.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Rubberduckxi said:


> I am wondering if a 29er Lefty Supermax 130mm would fit nicely. If I am right, then both 17.5 and 19.5 have the same headtube length, around 90mm, so a Lefty with 97mm bridge gap should fit... in theorie... but, I am a bit concerned about the minimum stem length that work with a Lefty, if its too short the handlebar might not fit... The Knock-Block I might still be able to use, if I machine a dedicated spacer and adapt a Hope stem... Your thoughts on my thoughts please...:skep:


Why do you want that odd Lefty Supermax? To save few pounds? It's expensive but probably only marginally better. And, as far as I know, you will need a new front wheel with lefty-hub.


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

Geniusbiker said:


> My recommendation regarding the brakes:
> Magura MT 7
> Not only because of their performance, but also because they look really fine on the Full Stache.
> 
> Btw: pedal strikes have never been an issue for me. I´m in the high position with 170 mm XX1 Eagle DUB cranks.


You have your front adapter installed wrong, the brake pads almost don't touch the rotor.


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

There is one reason only: Because it looks (in my eyes) great. I am a huge fan of Lefty... wheight isn‘t an issue for me anyway, I am looking for stable an reliable parts... of course, a Lefty requires a dedicsted hub / wheel.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Aglo said:


> You have your front adapter installed wrong, the brake pads almost don't touch the rotor.


Indeed! He have to flip the adapter.


----------



## the mayor (Nov 18, 2004)

Aglo said:


> You have your front adapter installed wrong, the brake pads almost don't touch the rotor.


Holy Crap!
But....the colors match....so who cares if the brakes work?


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

the mayor said:


> Holy Crap!
> But....the colors match....so who cares if the brakes work?


You speak the truth .


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

My personal gusto says, that the one who gave the color scheme to that frame was color blind... although, the will to have one is growing...


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

the mayor said:


> Holy Crap!
> But....the colors match....so who cares if the brakes work?


Thanks guys for all your advices regarding my front brake! But don´t worry: when I´ve made the picture I saw that there must be something wrong with the front adapter and corrected it. Would you believe: the mistake has been done from a professional bike mechanic!


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Rubberduckxi said:


> My personal gusto says, that the one who gave the color scheme to that frame was color blind... although, the will to have one is growing...


You have to see the color in person. Looks really great!


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

Geniusbiker said:


> You have to see the color in person. Looks really great!


You think? I will see... would like to combine a certain color for hubs to set some accent. The black seems a bit boring. But, in real it might be different, you are right.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Geniusbiker said:


> Thanks guys for all your advices regarding my front brake! But don´t worry: when I´ve made the picture I saw that there must be something wrong with the front adapter and corrected it. Would you believe: the mistake has been done from a professional bike mechanic!


Sometimes it's takes two tries before you fit correclty those adapters that come in many shapes from different manufactures...


----------



## Aglo (Dec 16, 2014)

Geniusbiker said:


> (...)Would you believe: the mistake has been done from a professional bike mechanic!


I have no problem believing in that. Why do you think no "_professional bike mechanic_" touch my bikes, unless a special tool is needed.


----------



## westernmtb (Dec 19, 2018)

I saw the bike mag vid and could not believe the type of terrain this bike could clear. Are their rider's skill levels completely off the charts or is this bike an actual billy goat?

The prospect of a 28 lbs build with 29+ wheels almost seems too good to be true.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

westernmtb said:


> I saw the bike mag vid and could not believe the type of terrain this bike could clear. Are their rider's skill levels completely off the charts or is this bike an actual billy goat?
> 
> The prospect of a 28 lbs build with 29+ wheels almost seems too good to be true.


29+ is pretty dang capable.

I have one (not this trek frame) that's a hair under 28# complete.


----------



## westernmtb (Dec 19, 2018)

I am really looking forward to demoing this bike. I've ridden 27.5+ HT and I felt like I could forego rear suspension with such a big tire, which was very impressive. OTOH, I've ridden standard 29er full suspension and wasn't impressed at all. 

Will Trek be having demo days in January or February on the west coast?


----------



## brewclymbr (Dec 9, 2018)

*Cam McCaul 29+ challenge*



westernmtb said:


> I am really looking forward to demoing this bike. I've ridden 27.5+ HT and I felt like I could forego rear suspension with such a big tire, which was very impressive. OTOH, I've ridden standard 29er full suspension and wasn't impressed at all.
> 
> Will Trek be having demo days in January or February on the west coast?


Check out this video you might like: Cam McCaul 29+ challenge






Sorry, had to edit had wrong url


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

That was a fun video, Cam is a goofball and a damn good rider.



brewclymbr said:


> Check out this video you might like: Cam McCaul 29+ challenge
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## dirk.dirk (Feb 15, 2019)

Super sale on show Stache 8:

https://www.trekbicyclesuperstore.com/product/trek-show-full-stache-8-21010.htm

Catch ... gotta pick it up in San Diego area or Albuquerque.


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

dirk.dirk said:


> Super sale on show Stache 8:
> 
> https://www.trekbicyclesuperstore.com/product/trek-show-full-stache-8-21010.htm
> 
> Catch ... gotta pick it up in San Diego area or Albuquerque.


Damn good deal...only got $400 off retail when I bought mine...clearance on a 2019 model?


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

Yeah, that's a smoking deal. Too bad I'm on the opposite side of the country!


----------



## phalkon30 (Jan 17, 2009)

For that discount you could rent a car and drive to get it!

Makes you wonder if there will be major changes for 19, that's a huge discount


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

phalkon30 said:


> For that discount you could rent a car and drive to get it!
> 
> Makes you wonder if there will be major changes for 19, that's a huge discount


Called my local Trek store (Michigan) and they were able to get me one for the same price! Life. Is. Good.


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

I just do not understand the need for the rear suspension??
I live in Montreal, Quebec and here some use their fatbike 4 months like me than switch to a 29+ wheelset for 8 months with a suspension fork. They all try to keep the weight down to 26-29 pounds. Maybe i am just a small rider but carrying that weight 12 months is hard to justify. I just enjoy 8 months on a light mountain bike with less drag.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

33red said:


> I just do not understand the need for the rear suspension??
> I live in Montreal, Quebec and here some use their fatbike 4 months like me than switch to a 29+ wheelset for 8 months with a suspension fork. They all try to keep the weight down to 26-29 pounds. Maybe i am just a small rider but carrying that weight 12 months is hard to justify. I just enjoy 8 months on a light mountain bike with less drag.


Pro tip: The world is vast. People are unique. Not everyone lives where you do, nor thinks within the incredibly narrow confines that you've described.


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

wellduh! said:


> Called my local Trek store (Michigan) and they were able to get me one for the same price! Life. Is. Good.


That's interesting. Perhaps a couple phone calls are in order ...


----------



## beastmaster (Sep 19, 2012)

I called the Trek Superstore in ABQ to see what the story is on these aforementioned Full Stache bikes. They are demo bikes, but they were mostly used indoors at trade events. They said they show light wear but are in good condition and will come with a full warranty. They didn't mention how many units they might have in each size.


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

beastmaster said:


> They are demo bikes, but they were mostly used indoors at trade events. .


maybe I missed it in the ad but 'demo' is a huge difference from discounted NIB. that should be front and center.


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

Carl Mega said:


> maybe I missed it in the ad but 'demo' is a huge difference from discounted NIB. that should be front and center.


Yeah, I had to wrap my head around that as well. They simply call it the "show" Stache without explaining what that meant exactly. I still think they're in better shape than "demo" bikes though. Plus... from what I've seen, demo bikes aren't even discounted this heavily (usually). The one I'm getting is so mint that you'd be hard pressed to tell it was anything other than new. Plus the warranty makes it worth it as well. IMO...


----------



## beastmaster (Sep 19, 2012)

It isn't like these bikes were demoed in technical terrain! They weren't ridden in mud, snow, or for miles and miles in the dirt. They said the bikes were ridden mainly indoors at trade events, but some of them were ridden in the parking lots outside of these events too. For $1350 in savings you can get better wheels and if there are some minor wear marks some place on the bike, so what?! I would hope you all would put these same marks on the bike in the first 100 miles anyway! If you were interested in a FS anyway, I wouldn't let these minor concerns be the reason not to get one of these! I have to have a little surgery on my knee and don't know if I will be weight-bearing or not for up to 8 weeks. Otherwise I would get one! For 1/3 off, why the hell not! Next Thursday when I find out exactly what my status is, I might be getting one unless you all beat me to one! Haha!


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

beastmaster said:


> It isn't like these bikes were demoed in technical terrain! They weren't ridden in mud, snow, or for miles and miles in the dirt. They said the bikes were ridden mainly indoors at trade events, but some of them were ridden in the parking lots outside of these events too. For $1350 in savings you can get better wheels and if there are some minor wear marks some place on the bike, so what?! I would hope you all would put these same marks on the bike in the first 100 miles anyway! If you were interested in a FS anyway, I wouldn't let these minor concerns be the reason not to get one of these! I have to have a little surgery on my knee and don't know if I will be weight-bearing or not for up to 8 weeks. Otherwise I would get one! For 1/3 off, why the hell not! Next Thursday when I find out exactly what my status is, I might be getting one unless you all beat me to one! Haha!


Amen to that. I'm NOT a fan of cold weather so I probably won't even ride for at least two months. I hadn't planned on purchasing a new bike anytime soon, but this was such a good deal I felt like I couldn't pass it up. Now I have time to add larger brake rotors, go tubeless, frame tape, etc. in my basement without feeling rushed. My only (minor) issue is that I'm not a fan of the color scheme. Knowing my luck, the 2020 model is gonna be some sexy colorway while I'm stuck riding the army green tank. But I've been burnt before choosing a bike based upon cosmetics, so...


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

A 1/3 off a bike that rides like a tree swaying in the breeze is not a good deal unless you can sell it and get your money back. Looking at these steep discounts, ya gotta feel bad for the folks who bought them "full boat" or are trying to sell a used Full Stache. This flooding the market thing is bad for customers.

I suspect the Full Stache will either be discontinued or "fixed", in which case I'd wait to see what Trek does next. If I was Trek, I'd tweak the Fuel EX to take a 3" tire, all they'd need is a revised triangle. They're almost there now, the current Fuel EX will take a 2.8" tire.

Except for a major frame redesign; ie change the drive side chainstay, I don't know how they could make the Full Stache frame less flexy and less heavy. Keep in mind that on top of being a wet noodle, the frame was 9#, so clearly more weight is not working.


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> A 1/3 off a bike that rides like a tree swaying in the breeze is not a good deal unless you can sell it and get your money back. Looking at these steep discounts, ya gotta feel bad for the folks who bought them "full boat" or are trying to sell a used Full Stache. This flooding the market thing is bad for customers.
> 
> I suspect the Full Stache will either be discontinued or "fixed", in which case I'd wait to see what Trek does next. If I was Trek, I'd tweak the Fuel EX to take a 3" tire, all they'd need is a revised triangle. They're almost there now, the current Fuel EX will take a 2.8" tire.
> 
> Except for a major frame redesign; ie change the drive side chainstay, I don't know how they could make the Full Stache frame less flexy and less heavy. Keep in mind that on top of being a wet noodle, the frame was 9#, so clearly more weight is not working.


Aaaaah... that's right. You had one and sold it, correct? As a former owner of the bike (and not just a test-rider), I consider you a valuable asset... So, too much flex and too heavy? How long did you have it? And what'd You (initially) replace it with?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

You could probably read through my comments in this thread ... as well as the comments from others 

So when I decided to buy a Full Stache, it was technically a placeholder while I waited for a Guerilla Gravity Smash. Like most folks who ride 29+, I was super excited to get one, I drove eight hours one way to buy it.

Before buying I spoke with a buddy who had ridden the bike and he said it was a good bike, BUT it was quite heavy and it was flexy in the rear triangle. He suggested I go back to a Lenz or get a Fuel EX. I threw caution to the wind and just went ahead with my plan to buy it. In retrospect, a Fuel EX would have been the right choice.

I rode the Full Stache hard for a couple months during peak summer riding season, did lots of technical riding, steep enduro stuff, as well as all day epics. I tweaked on the bike quite a bit, went to shorter cranks, increased fork travel to 140mm, changed up the cockpit, added stiff custom wheels, etc...

As much as I liked how the Full Stache rode; Trek has a pretty good suspension design, the constant tire rub on the chain and chainstays was concerning, a few times it stopped the wheel, and I was regularly concerned that the chain would be snapped. The stiffer wheels did not help with flex, so I ended up running 2.6 tires which reduced tire rub somewhat, but not enough for my piece of mind.

I sold the Full Stache to a guy in Texas through PB, since then I have been riding a GG Smash and recently picked up a Fezzari Signal Peak, the biggest tires I run now are 2.6".

I'll admit that the glamour of the new bike and my excitement at having a 29+ FS bike blinded me to it's faults initially, that and I hoped it would get better with stiffer wheels, etc... but in the end the Full Stache was faulty in the ways that I had been told. I've owned a few bikes over the years, none have been anywhere near as flexy as the Full Stache.

I've tried to spread the word so others can avoid making the same mistake, but human nature is a fickle thing, folks don't like be told what to do, sometimes being told no makes a person say yes even louder.

Hindsight and all, if someone really likes Trek, I'd suggest a Fuel EX and run 2.6-2.8 tires.

Buyer beware.



wellduh! said:


> Aaaaah... that's right. You had one and sold it, correct? As a former owner of the bike (and not just a test-rider), I consider you a valuable asset... So, too much flex and too heavy? How long did you have it? And what'd You (initially) replace it with?


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> You could probably read through my comments in this thread ... as well as the comments from others
> 
> So when I decided to buy a Full Stache, it was technically a placeholder while I waited for a Guerilla Gravity Smash. Like most folks who ride 29+, I was super excited to get one, I drove eight hours one way to buy it.
> 
> ...


Wow man! Thanks for the insight! Are you a heavier rider? Because I am, and I'm assuming this means I'll experience even more flex.


----------



## FoShizzle (Jan 18, 2004)

mikesee said:


> Pro tip: The world is vast. People are unique. Not everyone lives where you do, nor thinks within the incredibly narrow confines that you've described.


i hate it when i agree with you sir


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

wellduh! said:


> Wow man! Thanks for the insight! Are you a heavier rider? Because I am, and I'm assuming this means I'll experience even more flex.


I'm 195# nakid, I ride hard, but I'm over fifty, so I tend to keep things closer to the ground these days, mostly ride in the Tahoe area, like to ride fast, crash a fair amount 

I went through a skinny to fat to skinny transition over the past couple years, rode 29ers for years, started riding fat bikes after moving to WA, graduated to full suspension fat (Mutz, Fatillac), briefly flirted with 29+ (Wozo and Full Stache), now riding FS 27+ for tech riding and FS 29+ for XC and endurance.

As much as like big wheels, the compromises in terms of geometry and suspension design are just not worth the trade offs. I find a 27+ to be the best bike for me when I want to get rowdy. In terms of 29ers, those big wheels serve me best on long days in the saddle, so now I'm on a shorter travel carbon bike that makes the miles go by comfortably and more easilly.

If you like Trek, the Fuel EX is a nice bike, very versatile. If you like the big S, they have a similar bike in a variety of set ups.

You really can't go wrong with most modern bikes, but some have issues and it's good to know about those issues before dropping your hard earned money.

To be quite honest, Trek knew better that to release the Full Stache with the frame as designed, but then I should have listened to Mike


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

wellduh! said:


> this was such a good deal I felt like I couldn't pass it up


Not saying anyone made a bad decision in choosing to buy- what I'm saying is the ad doesn't reveal that important part; it'd matter to me - esp. if I traveled to get one and found out later it was a demo.

Edit to add: I've actually purchased Trek demos - probably demo'd hard too - but they had component upgrades and were more than 30% off.


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

To follow up on an earlier comment: I went to two Trek dealers here in Phoenix today. Both are places I know and have bought bikes from. Neither could find anything on this from Trek. One called their rep, who called the shop in San Diego. These are all used/demo bikes according to the info I received.

The ad is a touch misleading. And the only place to get the deal is through the Trek Superstore.


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

Carl Mega said:


> Not saying anyone made a bad decision in choosing to buy- what I'm saying is the ad doesn't reveal that important part; it'd matter to me - esp. if I traveled to get one and found out later it was a demo.
> 
> Edit to add: I've actually purchased Trek demos - probably demo'd hard too - but they had component upgrades and were more than 30% off.


All the demo's at my local trek store are only a few hundred off - definitely not 1/3... but, ultimately it's used the moment you take it on the trail anyway, so... I guess I'll take my chances. Plus, I'm not as mechanically inclined as others. I pay the extra $$$ for the maintenance package. Let them worry about it, ya know?


----------



## Carl Mega (Jan 17, 2004)

^I think it's a fine deal. Just more transparency. I bet 100% you'll enjoy this bike and for the price, yeah - pretty rad. Rip on it.


----------



## levity (Oct 31, 2011)

beastmaster said:


> I called the Trek Superstore in ABQ to see what the story is on these aforementioned Full Stache bikes. They are demo bikes, but they were mostly used indoors at trade events. They said they show light wear but are in good condition and will come with a full warranty. They didn't mention how many units they might have in each size.


FYI, the one I saw appeared to have some miles on it. The shop had spent time cleaning it, but there were signs of "outdoor activity" on the tires. The tires were a little dirty and were worn, sprue nubs gone and almost thru the shallow grooves on the knobs. The store was willing to give a 10% discount on new tires but were not willing to replace them. The few minor scratches and chips were not a big deal, but I agree that they could have been more forthcoming about the fact that the bikes weren't just "shown" but were also ridden a fair bit at trade events. Still, for the price you can buy new tires and add a few upgrades!


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

Nurse Ben said:


> You could probably read through my comments in this thread ... as well as the comments from others
> 
> So when I decided to buy a Full Stache, it was technically a placeholder while I waited for a Guerilla Gravity Smash. Like most folks who ride 29+, I was super excited to get one, I drove eight hours one way to buy it.
> 
> ...


I´m 85 kg, riding everything with my Full Stache since April ´18, never had any tire rubbing on the chain and chainstays, just a little bit of flex sometimes with the stock wheels, "problem" completely solved after having switched to carbon wheels (not because of the flex, but to make the bike lighter), now I feel only a little bit of movement in the back when the rear tire has a little bit too less pressure. My experience with the Full Stache is completely other than yours.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

I was very concerned about this rear flex talks when I ordered the bike. In my experience the amount of flex was exaggerated. I never experienced it to such degree it was an issue or blocking the rear wheel. I ride all-mountail stuff and semi-hardcore enduro, have used this bike for mountain bikepacking trips. I have frame in size M and carbon bontrager wheels. I can feel some rear flex but it's not a showstopper.

From my experience I can say that Full Stache is great if you want to ride 29x3.0 tires. If not - there's a lot of trail and even enduro bikes that can take 2.8 tires. I read people get this bike and then decide that 3.0 tires are way too much for them. They put a lighter 2.8 or even 2.6 tires to reduce the drag. This bike is designed around 3.0 tires, if you aren't 100% confident you want them I guess don't buy this bike then. Putting smaller tires will get bottom bracket very low. For some reason Trek made BB on this bike even lower than on Fuel Ex, Remedy or Slash. Performance-wise going with 2.8 tires on Full Stache demands a shorter cranks.

The bike is on the heavy side and feels burly, like a beefier Fuel Ex brother. Some upgrades are definitely welcome on this bike. Stock shock works well but if you want to ride more rough or enduro grade trails get a now available Trek-specific Fox DPX2 shock which is awesome. Putting a RCT3 charger in to suspension fork is another good idea. I also have replaced the brakes with better ones.

I don't like knock-block, the handlebar angles are ridiculous with it and it gives additional work packing the bike for train or plane.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

It’s not surprising to me that anyone would buy a bike and overlook negative reviews. I’m guilty of ignoring my inner voice and the opinion of a respected biker. Goes to show that no one is perfect.

What’s amazing is the attitude that anything negative should be attacked and minimized. If anything, negative feedback should be elevated and examined in detail. 

Clearly denial is more than a river.

For the Stache lovers in the crowd, would you also deny that the early aluminum Stache frames were flex free? There is precedent with excessive flex in bikes utilizing elevated chainstays, hence it’s rare use and general industry avoidance.

Whatever, maybe Trek will stiffen up the frame in 2020, then down the road we’ll look back and all agree that the frame was indeed flexy 🙄


----------



## PoshJosh (Mar 30, 2007)

Great. Now we get to listen to Ben whine about this bike again.... 

I own a 2016 stache hardtail. I weigh 220lbs. No noticeable flex for me. Everyone is different, obviously. 

I have not ridden the FS bike yet fwiw.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Geniusbiker said:


> I´m 85 kg, riding everything with my Full Stache since April ´18, never had any tire rubbing on the chain and chainstays, just a little bit of flex sometimes with the stock wheels, "problem" completely solved after having switched to carbon wheels (not because of the flex, but to make the bike lighter), now I feel only a little bit of movement in the back when the rear tire has a little bit too less pressure. My experience with the Full Stache is completely other than yours.


85kg...no wonder you have no tire rubbing


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

You miss my point.

I go through bikes like a teenager goes through moods, I could give a shite about this bike, it's long gone, literally three bikes ago.

My intent is to post realistic, non professional, non industry product reviews that educate a group of people with whom I have shared interests.

Some forum members I know in person, some I know only on line, most I don't know from Adam. Many, if not all forum and non members are looking for information on bikes and biking accessories.

I like to think that some people benefit from my reviews, just as I benefit from reviews posted by others.

Things I've learned on MTBR:

How to avoid undersizing my bike
Advances in products and new products
Good deals
Tips on people who build and sell bike accessories 
Product failures and design flaws, as well as solutions
Advances in design
Riding techniques 
Making friends/riding buddies 
Trail feedback, directions and tips for places to ride
Friendly banter
Not so friendly banter (I use "Block" liberally these days)
Etc, etc...

So no, I'm not here to complain about the Full Stache, I'm here to counter misdirection and subterfuge in order to help others avoid making the same mistake I made.

You don't have to like my feedback and you don't have to agree with my feedback.

What is most heartwarming for me is when I get feedback from someone thanking me for my comments.

This ^ happens often enough that I feel good about my contributions to this forum.

So there you go, no whining involved ?



Joshandhisbikes said:


> Great. Now we get to listen to Ben whine about this bike again....
> 
> I own a 2016 stache hardtail. I weigh 220lbs. No noticeable flex for me. Everyone is different, obviously.
> 
> I have not ridden the FS bike yet fwiw.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> You miss my point.


I see one problem here. You're very sceptical about any positive feedback that other people provide regarding this bike or rear flex. For some reason you think they all just defend their expensive purchase and didn't want to read negative opinions about the bike. I own the bike, I rode it a lot last autumn. I won't deny that rear flex is present but on my bike it doesn't bother me a lot, nor ruining my rides. I am not a gravity warrior or hard charger, I don't hit big air. My regular riding is something between agressive xc and adventure-exploration backcountry trail riding. I am happy with the bike, despite it having some flaws.


----------



## PoshJosh (Mar 30, 2007)

Thats my main issue with his "review." There are many others with the opposite opinion, or at least one that is less dramatic.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

Then...



Nurse Ben said:


> Flex, what Flex?
> 
> Don't believe what you read in reviews. The same guy who said the frame was flexy, then changed wheels and said the flex improved. Does that even make sense? It wasn't the frame, doh!...





Nurse Ben said:


> For me it's not so much about being inflammatory as it is fighting misinformation.
> 
> It's amazing how powerful a few off handed comments in a review can be and how the public responds to these comments.
> 
> ...


...Now



Nurse Ben said:


> It's not surprising to me that anyone would buy a bike and overlook negative reviews. I'm guilty of ignoring my inner voice and the opinion of a respected biker. Goes to show that no one is perfect.
> 
> What's amazing is the attitude that anything negative should be attacked and minimized. If anything, negative feedback should be elevated and examined in detail.





Nurse Ben said:


> So no, I'm not here to complain about the Full Stache, I'm here to counter misdirection and subterfuge in order to help others avoid making the same mistake I made.
> 
> You don't have to like my feedback and you don't have to agree with my feedback.
> 
> ...


LOL. Irony ain't just a river in Egypt. It's nice that you've become the voice of reason.

I can't be sure, but I think you may owe me a picture of you eating a book.


----------



## the mayor (Nov 18, 2004)

MrIcky said:


> Then...
> LOL. Irony ain't just a river in Egypt. It's nice that you've become the voice of reason.
> 
> I can't be sure, but I think you may owe me a picture of you eating a book.


This is the ultimate interwebz winner today!!!!!


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Depends on the book 

So I used to participate in a forum that collapsed when it's owner died.

I was a controversial member because I had trashed on a product that was supposed to revolutionize the sport. A forum member went back through all my posts and did just what you've done, assemble posts to make me look bad.

At the time it was very upsetting to me, but having experienced that once before, I no longer effing care.

You see, 99.9% of what people post online is spurious, done in the moment, often contextual, and rarely done in perfect pros.

Trying to compile a history of my posts to make me look bad, as if I were a politician, is a fools errand.

Think about how your posting history might be used to frame you?

Might be better off avoiding that trap, just saying ...

But sure, I like books ?



MrIcky said:


> Then...
> 
> ...Now
> 
> ...


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

Nurse Ben said:


> Depends on the book


How 'bout "101 uses for Aloe Vera" - cuz you got burned.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

It's really all in your perspective, being as I don't know you, it's hard for me to care what you think of me, so I'm not really feeling the burn.

Don't think to highly of yourself, this is not reality.



MrIcky said:


> How 'bout "101 uses for Aloe Vera" - cuz you got burned.


----------



## MrIcky (Oct 2, 2007)

Nurse Ben said:


> It's really all in your perspective, being as I don't know you, it's hard for me to care what you think of me, so I'm not really feeling the burn.
> 
> Don't think to highly of yourself, this is not reality.


Every so often I think I see a glimpse of a sense of humor between bouts of taking yourself and your opinion so damned seriously, then *poof*, nope- no sense of humor. I bet you're fun at parties.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Dontcha see the problem?

All you know of me is what I post on this forum, but my posts on this forum are a small fraction of who I am.

I could greet you on the street, talk to you about life, and you would still not know me, but you'd know me better after that interaction than you know me from MTBR.

It's all a mind ****e, try not to make our interactions out to be more than they are.

I actually dislike parties, don't drink, smoke, or use drugs. I'm a vegetarian for over thirty years, ex military, ex peace corps, speak five languages, and I practice psychiatry.

Or maybe I live i my parent's basement...

You can choose to believe anything you want to believe, it changes nothing.

People say I'm funny ... others think I'm too serious, as for me, I just wish the snow would melt so I can ride my damn bike!

Too much time on line, not enough riding, ugh, I wanna move to Arizona but my wife says no.



MrIcky said:


> Every so often I think I see a glimpse of a sense of humor between bouts of taking yourself and your opinion so damned seriously, then *poof*, nope- no sense of humor. I bet you're fun at parties.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Nurse Ben said:


> I wanna move to Arizona but my wife says no.


Arizona is getting pounded with snow.


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

Can I just say that I for one can appreciate Nurse Ben’s opinion. It seems we always hear a bunch of cheerleading about a new product - sometimes even before it has been thoroughly tested. It’s refreshing to hear an honest review even if it is (mostly constructive) criticism. Plus... this would be a boring place if we all had the same points of view, right?

It seems that the flex issue in the rear was just too much for Ben to consider keeping the bike - while others say it was no big deal. We all have a difference of opinions and although costly... sometimes you can’t know unless you try it for yourself. 

So... with all that being said... I’m still buying the bike. I had a HT Stache that I loved but it had its shortcomings. I had a Fuel Ex that I “liked” but it had problems too. I’m hoping the Full Stache gives me the best of each, but hey... it may just end up giving me the worse mix of each. If that’s the case, I’ll just sell it - like i did the HT Stache and the Fuel. I’m willing to take that risk.


----------



## Blatant (Apr 13, 2005)

I’m in Phx. I haven’t ridden in 3 days. Rain. And snow in as low an elevation as I’ve seen. But global warming is fake news, y’all.

It is funny to watch a grown man go to great lengths to defend his opinion about a bicycle on a forum in which he claims to not care about. Please, sir, tell us more. It’s fascinating.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

So....back to bikes then?


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

I’m curious if Trek will put the thru shaft shock on the next Full Stache model.

Anyone know if that thru shaft shock needs a special frame design?

Would like to try one on my FS...

I bumped my FS Pike up to 150 mm...wish I could increase the back to 150 mm too.

I still want to run 29 x 3.0 on a longer travel bike...guess that leaves a Pole Machine or Stamina...

Edit...dang, I missed the Lunchbox 29+ review


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

jbsocal said:


> I'm curious if Trek will put the thru shaft shock on the next Full Stache model.
> 
> Anyone know if that thru shaft shock needs a special frame design?
> 
> ...


Not sure about thru-shaft. I hope next Full Stache won't have Full Floater and will come with updated suspension design found on new models of Remedy and Slash. I believe full floater adds to rear flex.

I have Pole Stamina on my radar too but they say max tire it can take is 29x2.8.


----------



## Geniusbiker (Apr 27, 2018)

chelboed said:


> 85kg...no wonder you have no tire rubbing


Which means nothing else than that there are bikers out there on the Full Stache having no issues with chain or tire rubbing ;-)


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

Well for years Trek website says they sell the best bikes, good for over 100 K ? Are they wrong?


----------



## Stahr_Nut (Nov 7, 2006)

Nurse Ben said:


> A 1/3 off a bike that rides like a tree swaying in the breeze is not a good deal unless you can sell it and get your money back. Looking at these steep discounts, ya gotta feel bad for the folks who bought them "full boat" or are trying to sell a used Full Stache. This flooding the market thing is bad for customers.
> 
> I suspect the Full Stache will either be discontinued or "fixed", in which case I'd wait to see what Trek does next. If I was Trek, I'd tweak the Fuel EX to take a 3" tire, all they'd need is a revised triangle. They're almost there now, the current Fuel EX will take a 2.8" tire.
> 
> Except for a major frame redesign; ie change the drive side chainstay, I don't know how they could make the Full Stache frame less flexy and less heavy. Keep in mind that on top of being a wet noodle, the frame was 9#, so clearly more weight is not working.


Will the current model year Fuel EX really accept a 29x2.8" tire?


----------



## AlexCuse (Nov 27, 2011)

Dang I saw all the updates and hoped it’d be gossip about a new model.

Soon hopefully 🤔


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Geniusbiker said:


> Which means nothing else than that there are bikers out there on the Full Stache having no issues with chain or tire rubbing ;-)


Nah...it means Trek built a bike that should really appeal to bigger dudes like me at 6'2" 220# with 30.5 O.D. meats...but only works for little guys at 185# and down. Bigger, heavier riders who might push the bike through a corner or stand and honk up a climb will likely get rub. Little guys who won't stress the frame so much pushing corners will likely not get rub.

It's no secret that mountain bikes in general are designed for smaller guys under 6'. Heck, look at the stack height for the bike. 614 for the smallest to 635 for the largest. That's supposed to fit 5'3"-6'5".

So you're telling me that a guy that's 14" taller only needs a stack height that's less than 1 inch taller?!

Nah, man. Bikes are built for petite little 5'9" 155# riders in mind. We have to put ugly bars, ugly stems on to fit our frames. We get stuck with frames that flex when we ride them as designed.

My XL Stache requires me to run at least 15mm of headset spacers, 60x10deg stem, and a 37mm rise handlebar to give me proper bar height in relation to my saddle. What I wouldn't give to find a bike that I could actually run a 35x0deg stem with a flat-to-15mm rise bar, and no headset spacers.

I think all R&D depts should test their creations with the height and weight spectrum.


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

chelboed said:


> Nah...it means Trek built a bike that should really appeal to bigger dudes like me at 6'2" 220# with 30.5 O.D. meats...but only works for little guys at 185# and down. Bigger, heavier riders who might push the bike through a corner or stand and honk up a climb will likely get rub. Little guys who won't stress the frame so much pushing corners will likely not get rub.
> 
> It's no secret that mountain bikes in general are designed for smaller guys under 6'. Heck, look at the stack height for the bike. 614 for the smallest to 635 for the largest. That's supposed to fit 5'3"-6'5".
> 
> ...


Lots of real facts there. It is a nono but different bikes better fit a light 135 pounds rider like me and hopefully the 220 pounders can find bikes for their needs. But it is a secret, they try to sell all bikes to all potential buyers. Here they sell fatbikes with 4 season tires wich are shitty in our conditions. Not enough grip to climb. Not enough flotation so riders damage the trails. We have to call all that BS. Trek does good things but also other stuff like Specialized and many more.


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

Lol, true...true.


----------



## PoshJosh (Mar 30, 2007)

jbsocal said:


> I'm curious if Trek will put the thru shaft shock on the next Full Stache model.
> 
> Anyone know if that thru shaft shock needs a special frame design?
> 
> Would like to try one on my FS...


Thru shaft needs a bearing pivot at the lower shock mount since it does not use a bushing.


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

So... I did indeed buy the bike but my LBS says the largest rotors I can do is 200mm. I told them that the internet recommends 203mm, lol. Can you guys give me specifics about the 203mm rotors (and pads too please) so I can go back to the shop informed? Also, was it 203 front AND rear? Or 185mm rear? Or??? LBS recommends Avid 200mm rotors both front and rear. Please help fellas! 😂


----------



## dirk.dirk (Feb 15, 2019)

My flexy flier FS (not) purchase experience ...

https://forums.mtbr.com/29er-bikes/first-bike-recommendations-1098335.html#post14000838


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

wellduh! said:


> So... I did indeed buy the bike but my LBS says the largest rotors I can do is 200mm. I told them that the internet recommends 203mm, lol. Can you guys give me specifics about the 203mm rotors (and pads too please) so I can go back to the shop informed? Also, was it 203 front AND rear? Or 185mm rear? Or??? LBS recommends Avid 200mm rotors both front and rear. Please help fellas! 


I weigh about 240 lbs...put a sram 200 mm in front...left the 180 in back (same as my other bikes)...switched the pads to Galfer 1554T Pro Avid pads...so far, so good...Don't need a 200 mm in back for my weight and what I ride.


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

Thank you. And out of curiosity are you experiencing this rear end flex as well?


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

wellduh! said:


> Thank you. And out of curiosity are you experiencing this rear end flex as well?


I do get some flex and chain rub.

I want to try a stiffer 32 spoke 35i or 40i boost wheelset, but don't want to fork out a lot of $$$.


----------



## wellduh! (Aug 22, 2017)

^^^^^So if you could do it all over again would you go with a different bike altogether?


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

wellduh! said:


> ^^^^^So if you could do it all over again would you go with a different bike altogether?


No, but if I was buying a FS 29+ right now, I would also consider the new Lunchbox, mostly because I prefer more travel...it costs much more...I might consider building up a newer Lunchbox frame in the future.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Not sure, but Mikesee did a review that included comments about a buddy's Fuel EX 2018 I believe, that fit 2.8, so I suspect the 2019 is the same.

Since there really aren't any 29 x 2.8, you're probably looking at 2.6 tires. I bet a good Trek dealer could tell you or even do a test fit for you.

Also check on the Trek forum.

The Fuel EX is a very good bike.



Stahr_Nut said:


> Will the current model year Fuel EX really accept a 29x2.8" tire?


----------



## Stahr_Nut (Nov 7, 2006)

Nurse Ben said:


> Not sure, but Mikesee did a review that included comments about a buddy's Fuel EX 2018 I believe, that fit 2.8, so I suspect the 2019 is the same.
> 
> Since there really aren't any 29 x 2.8, you're probably looking at 2.6 tires. I bet a good Trek dealer could tell you or even do a test fit for you.
> 
> ...





Nurse Ben said:


> A 1/3 off a bike that rides like a tree swaying in the breeze is not a good deal unless you can sell it and get your money back. Looking at these steep discounts, ya gotta feel bad for the folks who bought them "full boat" or are trying to sell a used Full Stache. This flooding the market thing is bad for customers.
> 
> I suspect the Full Stache will either be discontinued or "fixed", in which case I'd wait to see what Trek does next. If I was Trek, I'd tweak the Fuel EX to take a 3" tire, all they'd need is a revised triangle. They're almost there now, the current Fuel EX will take a 2.8" tire.
> 
> Except for a major frame redesign; ie change the drive side chainstay, I don't know how they could make the Full Stache frame less flexy and less heavy. Keep in mind that on top of being a wet noodle, the frame was 9#, so clearly more weight is not working.


You're the one who made the original statement about 29x2.8's fitting. That's why I asked...


----------



## levity (Oct 31, 2011)

At the risk of continuing the thread hijack I can provide some info regarding the max size tire that fits in the Fuel EX (it's actually relevant to the thread because it deals with how unique the the Full Stache is).

A new 29x3.0 XR2 mounted on an i30 rim at 20psi will fit in the rear triangle of a 2019 Fuel EX 9.7. It spins freely, but it's very close with only ~2mm clearance at the chainstays. Any frame flex, mud or other debris would likely cause problems, and I decided it was too risky to even demo a Fuel EX to rest ride it with 29x3 tires.

The 29x3.0 XR2 I tested measured 2.8" wide at the casing and 2.9" at the knobs. The 29x3 XR4 tire I have on an i35 rim fits easily in the Full Stache but will not fit in the Fuel EX.

Based on the clearance, albeit tight, of the 29x3 XR2 I think the widest tire that one could use on the Fuel EX would 2.6". A Rekon 29x2.6 on an i30 rim measures 2.55-2.60" and should be fine. The Terrene McFly 29x2.8 has the same bead-to-bead and casing width as the Rekon 29x2.6 and would probably also fit the Fuel EX (note however that the McFly knobs are wider, and I have not tested its fit).


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

That's what Mike and others reported.

Since there aren't any tires true 2.8" tires, all ya got for choices are 3" and 2.6"

If you must have 3" tires, I'd get a Lenz. If you will run 2.6" tires, then the choices are legion.

Many folks end up running 2.6 tires because 3" can feel like overkill. I'll agree that's it's nice to have a choice.

Pretty clear. Thanks for checking.



levity said:


> At the risk of continuing the thread hijack I can provide some info regarding the max size tire that fits in the Fuel EX (it's actually relevant to the thread because it deals with how unique the the Full Stache is).
> 
> A new 29x3.0 XR2 mounted on an i30 rim at 20psi will fit in the rear triangle of a 2019 Fuel EX 9.7. It spins freely, but it's very close with only ~2mm clearance at the chainstays. Any frame flex, mud or other debris would likely cause problems, and I decided it was too risky to even demo a Fuel EX to rest ride it with 29x3 tires.
> 
> ...


----------



## hardmtnbiker (Feb 22, 2005)

AlexCuse said:


> Dang I saw all the updates and hoped it'd be gossip about a new model.
> 
> Soon hopefully ?


I hope the new model comes with 157mm spacing/hubs. That would really help the over dished wheel and inherent flex, especially with 50mm rims and 3" tires.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

What new model?



hardmtnbiker said:


> I hope the new model comes with 157mm spacing/hubs. That would really help the over dished wheel and inherent flex, especially with 50mm rims and 3" tires.


----------



## joegio (Aug 31, 2013)

I now have the FS and EX8 here in North NJ where most of the terrain is firm rocks, roots and mud, no sand or clay.

Im 200 lbs 6-4 so the cockpit is a little short on both so used knock block spacer clamp to change out the stem to 80mm 6deg stem and 35mm riser bars and extend fork out to 140mm on both and set the micro link to the longer setting.

EX8 has 2.6 xr4's at 18 psi which helped with BB clearance a bit, but made it noticeably slower, the FS is running with the 3.0's at 14 psi

I got the FS for the 3.0s and would not consider anything less, the traction is about as good as you can get in loose rocky climbs, the suspension and damping is dead on, with it 130 mm rear travel seems just right, its really a blend of a fat bike w/r to traction and suspension/handling of a AM bike, without the fat tire bounce.

Body fatigue is 0, leg fatigue is a different story. Its alot to push especially on level and slight climbs youll be at the back of the pack, for technical climbing if your in shape will be the last one that has to dismount on the "impossible" sections. For slow speed riding and crushing everything climbing or descending the EX cant compare, for faster descents the EX wins. For the same rear shock pressure 230# the FS has never reached full travel seems to be more progressive the the EX, will probably try an air spacer on the EX. Same with the front fork the Pike seems more progressive than the Fox 34 with air spacers.

The real Achilles heal of the FS is the rear wheel, the EX has the "real" Bontrager hub upgradeable to 6 pawls which is real tight, no problems what so ever after 1 year. The FS has what looks to be the Fomula 3-pawl hub which is now making a scary noise on steep climbs on my second ride (thats less than 20 miles). Ill bet the ratchet ring in the hub has cracked and/or is spinning. The other problem in my mind is that its 28 hole cross 2 pattern and flexes easily by hand you can make it hit the chain.

Chain rub, yes it does in first gear only. I think that 148 boost in not enough but it is what it is, so I slightly dished the wheel 1 spoke nipple turn to the non drive side.

Now I only get chain rub in first gear descending so its not very common, but its still BS, this wheel is suitable for riding around the local park duck pond not on critical rocky spine climbs, I dont get why a $3800 bike has such a weak wheel so be prepared to spend $500 on a quality hub and 32h rim, (I just ordered a DT350 hub and ARC 40 rim which Ill build up soon). Save the 28h rear rim for a spare front and let your kid play with the hub. As for carbon, Im not going to consider that since all my rims rub rocks on every ride.

Also you cant get the real feel for this bike riding around the bikeshop parking lot, you really need to demo it in your environment to truly understand the +/-'s. Probably more suited for the 40+ gang (like me).


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

joegio said:


> The real Achilles heal of the FS is the rear wheel, the EX has the "real" Bontrager hub upgradeable to 6 pawls which is real tight, no problems what so ever after 1 year. The FS has what looks to be the Fomula 3-pawl hub which is now making a scary noise on steep climbs on my second ride (thats less than 20 miles). Ill bet the ratchet ring in the hub has cracked and/or is spinning. The other problem in my mind is that its 28 hole cross 2 pattern and flexes easily by hand you can make it hit the chain.
> 
> I only get chain rub in first gear descending so its not very common, but its still BS, this wheel is suitable for riding around the local park duck pond not on critical rocky spine climbs, I dont get why a $3800 bike has such a weak wheel so be prepared to spend $500 on a quality hub and 32h rim, (I just ordered a DT350 hub and ARC 40 rim which Ill build up soon). Save the 28h rear rim for a spare front and let your kid play with the hub. As for carbon, Im not going to consider that since all my rims rub rocks on every ride.
> 
> Also you cant get the real feel for this bike riding around the bikeshop parking lot, you really need to demo it in your environment to truly understand the +/-'s. Probably more suited for the 40+ gang (like me).


Would like to know how much that new rear wheel improves your ride.

Bought a Spank oozy trail 395+ boost wheelset (i35) on closeout from Wiggle for around $400 that I was going to try on my FS (these look way stiffer than the stock wheels), before I decided to build up a different 29+ 3.0 bike with a little more travel.

I'm having a Lunchbox 29+ built up, so I'll probably sell my medium FS to help pay for it.

I may also consider keeping the FS and swapping out the wheels, and sell some other bikes instead...


----------



## chelboed (Jul 29, 2005)

joegio said:


> I now have the FS and EX8 here in North NJ where most of the terrain is firm rocks, roots and mud, no sand or clay.
> 
> Im 200 lbs 6-4 so the cockpit is a little short on both so used knock block spacer clamp to change out the stem to 80mm 6deg stem and 35mm riser bars and extend fork out to 140mm on both and set the micro link to the longer setting.
> 
> ...


I think Wayne at Speedgearbikeshop.com could build a nice rear wheel for cheaper than 500. He built up my HopePro4 Arc 40 wheelset for my Stache HT for barely over 600 and that's both wheels.

But I agree that's wack. A $3800 bike like this one should have a decent wheelset. Maybe even 32h on LG and XL.


----------



## CRAZY FRED (May 31, 2006)

chelboed said:


> I think Wayne at Speedgearbikeshop.com could build a nice rear wheel for cheaper than 500. He built up my HopePro4 Arc 40 wheelset for my Stache HT for barely over 600 and that's both wheels.
> 
> But I agree that's wack. A $3800 bike like this one should have a decent wheelset. Maybe even 32h on LG and XL.


Wayne is going to be building me that same wheel set in a couple weeks. Added bonus to price is that he is a great guy.


----------



## joegio (Aug 31, 2013)

Yea, If I would have know I would have made an inquiry. I just finished the rear wheel last night. Think Ill keep the front for now. I9 tourch hub, RF ARC Offset 40 rim, DT spoke 2.0 289/290, total cost shopping around $475. The offset rims help keep tension equal, old rims where at 20/25 tension, these I set to 23 all the way around using the Park tension gauge. Rim seems to have better lateral stability. Heading out later today.


----------



## joegio (Aug 31, 2013)

Cold rain here today, quick ride no chain rub 1st gear steep climb 28T front X-Sync-11 ring, (yea it works fine for $15 steel ring should last a long time), rear hub sounds good not too much buzz, just right I think. Trial by fire this weekend.

Also added the small (pink) air spacer to the FS rear shock and the medium (yellow) to the EX and have what I think is the right amount of sag and travel at 230 psi ride weight of 205 lbs. Both front forks have 3 spacers set to 140 mm travel. The air spacer seems to have helped the EX pedal strikes as well as the 2.6 tires and 140 air shaft. If I had to choose between the 2 now I'd say the EX8 XT can do 80% of what the FS can do and do it faster across the board for less $$$.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

If you have both bikes and one has the better wheels and less flex; the theory being the better wheels made the EX less flexy, why not just swap wheels between the two bikes and test the theory?

See, I went through this same process, the FS had too much flex so I got custom wheels, still had too much flex so I got narrower tires, still had too much flex, so I sold it ... and my conclusion was the same as yours: an EX would have been a better choice.

This ^^^ is what I've been saying all along, the damn FS frame is too flexy ?

But do carry on, keep throwing money at the FSN (Full Stache Noodle).

Fortunately most of the "stiffer" parts you add to the FSN can be moved to another bike down the road ?



joegio said:


> Cold rain here today, quick ride no chain rub 1st gear steep climb 28T front X-Sync-11 ring, (yea it works fine for $15 steel ring should last a long time), rear hub sounds good not too much buzz, just right I think. Trial by fire this weekend.
> 
> Also added the small (pink) air spacer to the FS rear shock and the medium (yellow) to the EX and have what I think is the right amount of sag and travel at 230 psi ride weight of 205 lbs. Both front forks have 3 spacers set to 140 mm travel. The air spacer seems to have helped the EX pedal strikes as well as the 2.6 tires and 140 air shaft. If I had to choose between the 2 now I'd say the EX8 XT can do 80% of what the FS can do and do it faster across the board for less $$$.


----------



## joegio (Aug 31, 2013)

Just to clarify, the EX8 rear wheel was just fine for a 2.6 tire, no rub, pedal strikes were an issue but the air spacer helped. Main reason for the FS was 3.0+ tires front and rear, yea the fork is also part of it, I checked a 2018 Fox Float 36 vs the Pike+ and the Pike+ has way more room, so its a frame and fork issue.

The FS has plenty of room for 3.0 and more comes with 40 ish, really 36mm internal rims, so swapping either way is not going to help and I would want to go with a smaller tire on the FSN and loose ground clearance. 

My gripe the FSN needs a better rear wheel from the factory, hub, spoke count and could be wider. Too bad the engineers went thru a lot to get this on the table and the accounting team killed it to save a few $, meanwhile the import duty adds $150 to the cost from last year.

I waited to find a closeout deal, otherwise I would have passed on the FSN.


----------



## joegio (Aug 31, 2013)

Rode Ringwood NJ red trail from the school to yellow, down the white, back to red to Shepards lake for those who know the area. First half of the ride was great, no tire rub and purposely spent some time in first gear climbing and thru the rocks, no issues. I thinking the offset rim helps alot here, probably never go back to shallow dish drive side again. Blasted thru areas if never cleared before especially steep downhill rock gardens, knocks 2 points off my trail difficulty rating in almost all conditions. Comfort rating I dont think could be better and still able to climb like a goat. Second half in 3+ hrs I really started to drag, ran into some guys on Top Fuels thats when I realize how slow I was going on the moderately technical race course sections, they just pulled away chatting, while I dug deep to keep up, until the next downhill then I just took the straight line over everything in my way. Also the quick ratchet on the I9 heped ALOT with pedal strikes thru the rocks and techy climbs.

Hope this helps.


----------



## SSUP DEE (Apr 11, 2019)

*Liking my FS*









Thanks to this forum I picked up one of the "Show" Full Stache's that were on sale in SD. First things I changed were the brakes which I upgraded to Hope E4 and the BB to DUB (so I can interchange my Quarq power meter between my bikes) and I replaced the conventional trigger shifters for gripshift which I really like(quicker shifts, easier shifts and u can dump all the gears just at a roll of the wrist). Almost 2 months and 500 miles later this bike has delivered. The BB is pretty low so pedal strikes are a thing but totally negligible(haven't flipped the MINO chip yet). I also get the chain rub which I seen people mention but I think it may be a 29+ issue due to tire flexing because I get the same thing on my Salsa Woodsmoke. Also on my last ride I broke a spoke so that is definitely and issue according to this forum. Overall the bike fits my expectations, I have taken on multiple 4k'+ rides and she climbs like a dream soaking up the black diamonds on the way down like nothing. If they ever release a carbon version I will probably jump on it.


----------



## ghughes.hesinc (Jun 10, 2009)

SSUP DEE said:


> View attachment 1247354
> 
> 
> Thanks to this forum I picked up one of the "Show" Full Stache's that were on sale in SD. First things I changed were the brakes which I upgraded to Hope E4 and the BB to DUB (so I can interchange my Quarq power meter between my bikes) and I replaced the conventional trigger shifters for gripshift which I really like(quicker shifts, easier shifts and u can dump all the gears just at a roll of the wrist). Almost 2 months and 500 miles later this bike has delivered. The BB is pretty low so pedal strikes are a thing but totally negligible(haven't flipped the MINO chip yet). I also get the chain rub which I seen people mention but I think it may be a 29+ issue due to tire flexing because I get the same thing on my Salsa Woodsmoke. Also on my last ride I broke a spoke so that is definitely and issue according to this forum. Overall the bike fits my expectations, I have taken on multiple 4k'+ rides and she climbs like a dream soaking up the black diamonds on the way down like nothing. If they ever release a carbon version I will probably jump on it.


Nice shot!


----------



## sknyboy (May 5, 2017)

*3.0 Fuel EX 9.9 2017 model*



levity said:


> At the risk of continuing the thread hijack I can provide some info regarding the max size tire that fits in the Fuel EX (it's actually relevant to the thread because it deals with how unique the the Full Stache is).
> 
> A new 29x3.0 XR2 mounted on an i30 rim at 20psi will fit in the rear triangle of a 2019 Fuel EX 9.7. It spins freely, but it's very close with only ~2mm clearance at the chainstays. Any frame flex, mud or other debris would likely cause problems, and I decided it was too risky to even demo a Fuel EX to rest ride it with 29x3 tires.
> 
> ...


Hi all, hope my experience with a 2017 Fuel might be of interest.

Was considering a FS, nearby shop had one 25% off new, but decided to try B+ full sus. Picked up a nice 2017 Fuel EX 9.9 frame, built it B+ and absolutely HATED it. Don't ride particularly gnarly stuff near home and never had to ratchet so much to avoid pedal strike. "Nice low bottom bracket" my a33.

Well, not knowing what to do with this horrible bike, found my 3.0 WTB Ranger on 50mm Mulefut rim fit in the rear triangle. Completely transformed it.

Had the most fun with this on gnarly, muddy, rocky trails. Fantastic rollover with 3.0 front and rear. A little more playful with the 27.5 x 3.8 on the front.

Kinda a carbon Full Stache.


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

sknyboy said:


> Hi all, hope my experience with a 2017 Fuel might be of interest.
> 
> Was considering a FS, nearby shop had one 25% off new, but decided to try B+ full sus. Picked up a nice 2017 Fuel EX 9.9 frame, built it B+ and absolutely HATED it. Don't ride particularly gnarly stuff near home and never had to ratchet so much to avoid pedal strike. "Nice low bottom bracket" my a33.
> 
> ...


I switched from 175 arms to 165, not expensive, great results.


----------



## sknyboy (May 5, 2017)

Tried 170’s but didn’t find that a good solution, have found 165’s a little short. Still not understanding the overall value of a low BB for myself. 

29 x 2.6’s would likely work well on this bike but didn’t have any laying around in the garage 😀.


----------



## 2old (Aug 31, 2015)

^^^I guess if you rode well groomed flow trails you would love it. I hated low bb with limp rear suspension so much that I now own a fatbike and a Stache. Low bb isn't much fun in midwest roots and rock.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Ok, the new 2020 Full Stache is on the Trek website now.

Different color (don't like it), minor changes to some geo - some numbers are a little bit different by a pinch (or maybe just more accurate compared to 2019 version), some components have changed too - newer version of fork, new Trek saddle etc.

Basically 99.9% the same bike. Sigh.


----------



## togreger (Mar 8, 2017)

Mebaru said:


> Ok, the new 2020 Full Stache is on the Trek website now.
> 
> Different color (don't like it), minor changes to some geo - some numbers are a little bit different by a pinch (or maybe just more accurate compared to 2019 version), some components have changed too - newer version of fork, new Trek saddle etc.
> 
> Basically 99.9% the same bike. Sigh.


Cant find it. Link?


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

togreger said:


> Cant find it. Link?


https://www.trekbikes.com/us/en_US/...tain-bikes/full-stache/full-stache-8/p/28679/


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Apparently that flexy rear triangle is more than just flexy, , it’s fragile too. The guy who bought my used Full Stache just wrote to tell me he had cracked the rear triangle. Bummer for him ☹


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> Apparently that flexy rear triangle is more than just flexy, , it's fragile too.


I don't think you can qualify a rear triangle to be fragile just on one incident. For instance, I never seen anyone else reported this and I've been tracking Full Stache topics on various forums and facebook for over a year now.

My bike have seen lots of use and abuse over last 4 months - bikepacking, rough primitive trails, bikeparks. Still good and sound though I've made a lot of upgrades - wheels, brakes, fork, shock, cockpit. For me flex problem is a little bit exaggerated (have M size and I don't weigh a ton).

I believe this bike philosophy can be described as "adventure full suspension bike" and it definitely isn't a quiver killer. I do want a better geo but I don't think I will upgrade to newer versions unless Trek will come with something really superior.


----------



## BikeMaker (Aug 13, 2019)

Hello all,

I wanted to tell you about this machine. From reading many of these threads it reads as many of the bikes in other threads, lovers, haters, and those who have no business mentioning anything because their comments reveal to those who actually own the bike recognize the [email protected]#$.

So let me clear a few things out the door for you. I have been riding my Trek Full Stache large now for around a year now. This is my fifth full suspension bike. So to add real value to the discussion let me tell you why i love this bike. 

If your looking for a cross country bike - this bike could do it, but so could my ancient Cannondale flying "v" This is not the design purpose of the Trek Full Stache.

If your looking for a D.H. bike to crush Redbull Rampage or planning to set any world record jumps or cliff drops. This is not the purpose of the Trek Full Stache. Can it jump, hell yes it can. Can it run the features on a triple black diamond. Yes it can and well and more than likely provide more ability than you have to use it. But it will not perform as well as a down hill specific bike.

The Trek Full Stache was designed as a long distance back country alpine riding multi-day bike that eats up roots, walks crags, and can traverse extremely rugged faced trails. And it does it quickly and effectively. This bike is great to drop all your gear in a ride and have the ability to allow you to session at a feature.

Lets talk chain rub and rear flex. I am 6' tall and weigh rough 178# I have ridden this bike through tight berms in low "g" and high "g" the only time I was ever able to get chain rub was when i was climbing in Eagle on what any other bike I own wouldn't have had the traction to climb in the first place, other than my fat-bike which is a whole other story of love.

Some people say "well it needs a carbon version". Again this is a distance bike, its meant to be out there for days, it carries bags and packs and it gets dinged up by what your carrying. To say that you need it in Carbon shows that you either have money to waste for a few #s of savings or else you bought the bike without thinking of its intention and design purpose. <-- read an article on how to pick your first bike

Then I read, Get a slayer or fuel ex and its the same bike but better. That statement to all you all out there looking at this bike should indicate to you right off the bat these are people you should pass on for advice. I own a Trek Fuel ex9.9 and it is nothing at all like my stache. The fuel as well is a great bike and has amazing abilities that I don't get from the stache <-- this is a bike Id race. But it doesn't suck up roots, it doesn't traverse crag anywhere close to the stache, not even in the same universe of plush riding. The Stache I can ride for weeks. The fuel for a few days, and to get more I'd have to upgrade my saddle, upgrade upgrade, but most would call adding comfort weight a downgrade to a trek fuel or a Cannondale Scalpel. So understand the product you are purchasing and the intent.

Back to frame flex or should we say rear triangle. At my weight there is none that my riding brings out to be noticeable, granted I'm not popping off huge bowls and drop ins, i'm not hitting the slope style park with it. But you bet your ass I would'nt be afraid to. But I know that's not what I bought this bike for, I know it is at the end of a spectrum its really not going to promote that as easily as my trek fuel.

This bike is not a bike to rule them all, this bike is not a quiver killer.
However I will say based off the parks I have been to over my life time and based off the general riding of most people I have met and observed, this bike would far exceed most peoples abilities to push its limits, and even if you push the limits you are not gonna break this bike.

SO my question is , I get it you watch "x" games, most of these kids on here are young and have aspirations to run rampage with Semenuk and the rest. But here is the reality. 90% or greater of riders are looking for a bike that can get down and get you where you are going. If you're racing a multi day race you would be better off in a Cadillac than a Lamborghini. This bike will allow you to ride for days on end once you have your ass broke into the saddle and muscle development and cardio in place. I love this bike, above almost all of my bikes. It's fun, its ridiculously fast and once shes up to speed the thing you will hear over and over about this bike is the speed it can come up to and be controlled.

Lets talk about the brakes. This bike cant handle any currently made brakes and feel like the Cannondale or fuel. The 3" width tires on this bike will not stop rolling with your weight and force behind it. The magura brakes I subbed out on it boiled. Yeah the brakes stopped it better at slow speeds however when I ride on long downhill and hit the 35 mph mark on large slope or wide flow trail. This bike has just to much contact with the earth to simply just lock up like a traditional bike. And here again is x-game brains and extreme sports minded individuals trying to make the bike something other than its intent. The wheels chosen for this machine are for climbing and traction. There has to be some give and take (ying / yang) ratio between brakes and surface area.

So to most of these posts I have read ,,, now speaking to those who are looking at this bike. Ignore them if you know your intent of purchasing this bike marks these bells.
1-long distance biking in remote areas
2-rugged frame that can take abuse
3-looking to take along bags or packs
4- great bike for riding on local trails for a fun day (not out to break xgames records or clearing 25' gaps jumps <-- could do it but this bike is heavier than my trail bike)
5- looking for a bike that will climb nearly anything that you have cardio to motivate < this I have proven over and over and over with my friends on the trails, it just has unlimited grip. Say goodbye to slipping on most roots.
6-You want a comfortable bike for your long trip , you planning to ride the tour divide this is your machine. 

So if you can get out of that one quiver killer bike mentality and understand the type of riding you like to do, and you understand the demands of the bike you need for each discipline, then there is no reason to overlook the Trek Full Stache.


----------



## Freddy_G (Jul 27, 2016)

Mebaru said:


> Ok, the new 2020 Full Stache is on the Trek website now.
> 
> Different color (don't like it), minor changes to some geo - some numbers are a little bit different by a pinch (or maybe just more accurate compared to 2019 version), some components have changed too - newer version of fork, new Trek saddle etc.
> 
> Basically 99.9% the same bike. Sigh.


I love the new colour on the other hand! 😀

Looks like they "fixed" the brakes, it seems know it's got Guide RE and 200/180 discs. First thing I replaced, so this is good for the new buyers.


----------



## BikeMaker (Aug 13, 2019)

How did he crack the rear triangle, did he actually break an arm in it???????? HOw much does that joker weigh?


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

BikeMaker said:


> How did he crack the rear triangle, did he actually break an arm in it???????? HOw much does that joker weigh?


I don't know that I'd call breaking your frame a joke, at least he's not laughing.

As far as I know, he's a normal sized guy, so perhaps not blaming the user would be a good start, just saying it could be you next.


----------



## BikeMaker (Aug 13, 2019)

Wont be me. Not sure I believe you to begin with. Much less your earlier opinions and descriptions. Being an abp design there no welded triangle parts. So either he broke an arm of the triangle, or piivot hardware. Troll on.


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

Did they make the rear triangle any stiffer or just change the color? I like the new color too.


----------



## phalkon30 (Jan 17, 2009)

Maybe nurse Ben had a cracked rear triangle to start and that's why he noticed the flex so bad?

Never seen someone so hurt bike a bike purchase before...


----------



## RobertH (Oct 19, 2007)

BikeMaker said:


> Hello all,
> 
> I wanted to tell you about this machine. From reading many of these threads it reads as many of the bikes in other threads, lovers, haters, and those who have no business mentioning anything because their comments reveal to those who actually own the bike recognize the [email protected]#$.
> 
> /snip


Excellent post. Thank you.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

phalkon30 said:


> Maybe nurse Ben had a cracked rear triangle to start and that's why he noticed the flex so bad?
> 
> Never seen someone so hurt bike a bike purchase before...


Never seen someone so defensive about a bike before.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

BikeMaker said:


> Wont be me. Not sure I believe you to begin with. Much less your earlier opinions and descriptions. Being an abp design there no welded triangle parts. So either he broke an arm of the triangle, or piivot hardware. Troll on.


I'll post pics if he gets back to me. Having never broken a bike, I feel bad for the guy, I suspect there are other folks who have broken them, just not many are on this forum.

Excessive flex is likely the reason it broke, metal, esp aluminum, can only take so many flex cycles before failing.

Typically a new rear triangle will run $500-750 out of warranty, it's the cost of buying used, but it still sucks for him.

The swingarm failures I have seen were stripped pivots, cracks at the lower brace, and occassionally mid stay breaks. Mid stay breaks are a classic failure in the Salsa carbon bikes.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

I'm 6'1" and 225-230 (depending on what I ate/drank the night before). I also ride my bikes pretty hard with drops, jumps, and rough trails. 

Should I be worried about the rear triangle on the new 2020? I really want a 29x3.0 designed bike but was hoping it would have 140mm or better yet 150mm travel. 

With 130mm and a potential concern with the rear triangle, especially at my weight and riding style, what do you guys think? Good idea or not?


----------



## brewclymbr (Dec 9, 2018)

roughster said:


> I'm 6'1" and 225-230 (depending on what I ate/drank the night before). I also ride my bikes pretty hard with drops, jumps, and rough trails.
> 
> Should I be worried about the rear triangle on the new 2020? I really want a 29x3.0 designed bike but was hoping it would have 140mm or better yet 150mm travel.
> 
> With 130mm and a potential concern with the rear triangle, especially at my weight and riding style, what do you guys think? Good idea or not?


I can't comment on the rear triangle.

However for the bike that the Full Stache is, 130mm of travel is pretty darn adequate. I have a Stache 7. I did increase the travel from 120 to 130mm. You could do the same and if needed bump up your travel to 140mm. The Pike, Lyrik or Yari fork can be upgraded fairly easily with the Debonair upgrade kit. Not sure if that helps any


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

Other than the frame wheels might need special attention.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

The Full Stache is not a jump bike, it's more for backcountry exploring, tech riding, cushy flow.

If you must run 29 x 3" tires, you need a burlier bike for your described needs, something like the Lenz Behemoth or Fatillac.

For an off the shelf 29" bike that can take 29 x 2.6, there are lots of choices with more travel and more robust builds.



roughster said:


> I'm 6'1" and 225-230 (depending on what I ate/drank the night before). I also ride my bikes pretty hard with drops, jumps, and rough trails.
> 
> Should I be worried about the rear triangle on the new 2020? I really want a 29x3.0 designed bike but was hoping it would have 140mm or better yet 150mm travel.
> 
> With 130mm and a potential concern with the rear triangle, especially at my weight and riding style, what do you guys think? Good idea or not?


----------



## litespeedaddict (Feb 18, 2006)

If the new Fuel EX accepts 2.8's...and I have no idea if it does (lil help??)...not sure if I'd even consider a fully boinged out Stache.


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

I remember on some thread a guy describing how much he loved his full stache.
He could look at the birds and let the monster truck factor deal with the stuff on the trail.
Not exactly a fast rider.
On winter here we love our 4 months of snow playing on our fat but the other 8 months i enjoy a bike with more acceleration.


----------



## Tillers_Rule (Sep 11, 2004)

Seems to be quite a bit of over-thinking on what a bike is for a can do. 

I've seen Full Staches at bike parks, jumping, technical, guys just having a blast.

Don't let comments pigeon-hole you into thinking you need to ride this way or that way, or the bike is "for this". Get what you like, ride it and have fun.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

No one knows, it's too new, but comes with 2.6, so a 2.8 will probably fit, you need to see one in person to decide. I think the previous version of the Fuel EX fit 2.8, but it often depends on the tire cuz some are bigger than others.

I think the Specialized Stumpjumper also fits 2.6-2.8



litespeedaddict said:


> If the new Fuel EX accepts 2.8's...and I have no idea if it does (lil help??)...not sure if I'd even consider a fully boinged out Stache.


----------



## roughster (Dec 18, 2017)

Nurse Ben said:


> No one knows, it's too new, but comes with 2.6, so a 2.8 will probably fit, you need to see one in person to decide. I think the previous version of the Fuel EX fit 2.8, but it often depends on the tire cuz some are bigger than others.
> 
> I think the Specialized Stumpjumper also fits 2.6-2.8


Yeah that too me is the super question. If the 20 TFEX fits a 2.8, I'm all in. If not, I'm probably going to go Lenz Behemoth in the full upgraded model to go full plush. Why TF not, I deserve it


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

Does anybody know why the old frameset cost more than the new one? Are there differences except the color?

2019 frameset costs 2199$
2020 frameset costs 1999$


----------



## phalkon30 (Jan 17, 2009)

Tariffs? General increasing costs? Market allows it? Cover warranty costs? We'd probably be guessing

Haven't read any changes, would be out of cycle to make substantial changes this year is my guess


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

phalkon30 said:


> Tariffs? General increasing costs? Market allows it? Cover warranty costs? We'd probably be guessing
> 
> Haven't read any changes, would be out of cycle to make substantial changes this year is my guess


So why selling same thing for less? Old will never sell again.
Very strange, complete bike has again same price...


----------



## Kevin Van Deventer (Jan 31, 2015)

Mebaru said:


> I see one problem here. You're very sceptical about any positive feedback that other people provide regarding this bike or rear flex. For some reason you think they all just defend their expensive purchase and didn't want to read negative opinions about the bike. I own the bike, I rode it a lot last autumn. I won't deny that rear flex is present but on my bike it doesn't bother me a lot, nor ruining my rides. I am not a gravity warrior or hard charger, I don't hit big air. My regular riding is something between agressive xc and adventure-exploration backcountry trail riding. I am happy with the bike, despite it having some flaws.


 So you don't ride it hard and you still can feel flex....


----------



## phalkon30 (Jan 17, 2009)

Rubberduckxi said:


> So why selling same thing for less? Old will never sell again.
> Very strange, complete bike has again same price...


Facepalm, read it backwards


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

Kevin,

The rear triangle is so soft that you can touch the tire to the chainstays by flexing the bike laterally while standing on one crank arm.

The shame/bummer is that the bike really does ride well, the suspension feels good, the geometry is spot on, hell, I even liked the original army green and yellow color scheme.

I talked to a guy, who knows a guy who worked as a designer on this frame and he said, that they said, that they couldn't get the rear triangle to be any stiffer without going away from the elevated stay.

So you buy this bike knowing the weaknesses (frame flex) and you ride it appropriately or you get a different bike that has less tire capacity and less frame flex. The Fuel EX and the Full Stache are quite similar, the only difference is tire capacity and frame flex. If you can get by with 2.6-2.8 tires, then get the Fuel.



Kevin Van Deventer said:


> So you don't ride it hard and you still can feel flex....


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

Nurse Ben said:


> Kevin,
> 
> The rear triangle is so soft that you can touch the tire to the chainstays by flexing the bike laterally while standing on one crank arm.
> 
> ...


Could it not be, that not the rear triangle is the flexy problem but the wheels? I mean, 28 spokes for such a big wheel, and then not even a asymetric rim to get similar left to right spoke tension?! That wheel I would guess is as well contributing to tire rubbing.
Meaning, with a better / stiffer wheel that tire rubbing could be massively improved.

I do not have the Full Stache, but I am thinking about to get one blue frameset, like that color an 29x3 tires ...


----------



## jbsocal (Feb 12, 2011)

Rubberduckxi said:


> Could it not be, that not the rear triangle is the flexy problem but the wheels? I mean, 28 spokes for such a big wheel, and then not even a asymetric rim to get similar left to right spoke tension?! That wheel I would guess is as well contributing to tire rubbing.
> Meaning, with a better / stiffer wheel that tire rubbing could be massively improved.
> 
> I do not have the Full Stache, but I am thinking about to get one blue frameset, like that color an 29x3 tires ...


It's both.

I bought a much stiffer wheelset but didn't mount it.

I'm selling my medium..only because I like my Lunchbox 29+ better, it has more travel.

My two dogs died, basenji puppies cost $1500 each...gonna sell two bikes to get some new companions...otherwise I would put on the stiffer wheels and keep it.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

I ran a custom wheelset from day one, which certainly reduce wheel flex over the stock wheels, but did nothing for frame flex.

Many bikes come with 28 spoke wheels but don't have issues with frame flex ... there's a pattern here ?

Lots of optimism, just not well deserved in this case.

Just get the Fuel Ex or a hardtail Stache.



Rubberduckxi said:


> Could it not be, that not the rear triangle is the flexy problem but the wheels? I mean, 28 spokes for such a big wheel, and then not even a asymetric rim to get similar left to right spoke tension?! That wheel I would guess is as well contributing to tire rubbing.
> Meaning, with a better / stiffer wheel that tire rubbing could be massively improved.
> 
> I do not have the Full Stache, but I am thinking about to get one blue frameset, like that color an 29x3 tires ...


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

Nurse Ben said:


> I ran a custom wheelset from day one, which certainly reduce wheel flex over the stock wheels, but did nothing for frame flex.
> 
> Many bikes come with 28 spoke wheels but don't have issues with frame flex ... there's a pattern here 
> 
> ...


Fuel Ex is no option, doesn't fit 3" on 40-50 rim, unfortunately...
Stache hardtail, well I have my GODZILLA


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

Fuel EX 2019 is able to take most of 2.8 tires. You still can have 3.0 in front, which counts more than rear. If I was buying a new 29+ Trek FS trail bike, I probably would go with new Fuel EX 2020 - lighter, better geo and much better suspension - finally, they got rid of Full Floater design which actually adds to flex. Short chainstays are overrated. With 29x3.0 and 29x2.8 rear I believe it would be still as good as Full Stache 90% time. The only downside -really small selection of good trail and aggressive 2.8 tires. But amount of good 3.0" tires isn't better either.


----------



## Sanchofula (Dec 30, 2007)

3” tires have limited utility, limited market, it’s always been that way, hence the demise of the Gazz and their ilk.

In the bigger wheels, folks are much more likely to get on well with a 2.6, simply because they’re lighter, faster, and easier to manage.

You want your fat tires, drop to a 27.5 and you got choices aplenty.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Mebaru said:


> Fuel EX 2019 is able to take most of 2.8 tires. You still can have 3.0 in front, which counts more than rear. If I was buying a new 29+ Trek FS trail bike, I probably would go with new Fuel EX 2020 - lighter, better geo and much better suspension - finally, they got rid of Full Floater design which actually adds to flex. Short chainstays are overrated. With 29x3.0 and 29x2.8 rear I believe it would be still as good as Full Stache 90% time. The only downside -really small selection of good trail and aggressive 2.8 tires. But amount of good 3.0" tires isn't better either.


Setting aside most of your questionable statements, I'll simply point out that there are precisely 3 readily/consistently available options for 29 x 2.8" available right now, and the two that I've used measure 2.55" (when stretched) on 35mm internal width rims.


----------



## Mebaru (Jun 5, 2017)

mikesee said:


> Setting aside most of your questionable statements, I'll simply point out that there are precisely 3 readily/consistently available options for 29 x 2.8" available right now, and the two that I've used measure 2.55" (when stretched) on 35mm internal width rims.


Would you mind telling which statements you find questionable please? I wrote from my personal experience and experience of the people I am riding with. If you think that some of my statements are arguable (they probably are) I would be interested to read your opinion on the subject.

Well, that's the problem with 29+. Poor selection (for example, no proper downhill or wet tires), and most of the 29x2.8" aren't true to size.

I am stuck with XR4 because it's basically the lightest tire that offers the best grip in most situations. But I'm not really satisfied with it.


----------



## Rubberduckxi (Sep 10, 2015)

Rubberduckxi said:


> So why selling same thing for less? Old will never sell again.
> Very strange, complete bike has again same price...


I asked Trek directly 

Answer:
The 2019 version is actually on sale, so it is currently cheaper, but the base price is less expensive because the 2020 version isn't made in China, so the tariff's aren't affecting the price of the bike!


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Mebaru said:


> Would you mind telling which statements you find questionable please?





Mebaru said:


> Fuel EX 2019 is able to take most of 2.8 tires.


If you mean 2.5's labeled as 2.8's, then OK.



Mebaru said:


> You still can have 3.0 in front, which counts more than rear.


No. You can't fake air volume when it comes to absorbing impacts and protecting rims. Witness the proliferation of tire inserts where people whom don't have enough air volume in their tires are trying to "fix" it by adding a heavy and more complex band-aid.



Mebaru said:


> Full Floater design which actually adds to flex.


There is no proof for this.



Mebaru said:


> Short chainstays are overrated.


Perhaps where you live and ride this is true. Chainstay length and bottom bracket height (and the relationship between the two) *matter* where I live and ride.


----------



## 33red (Jan 5, 2016)

They are like surf boards some like short, some like long like colors not all like the same.


----------



## sml-2727 (Nov 16, 2013)

BikeMaker said:


> Hello all,
> 
> I wanted to tell you about this machine. From reading many of these threads it reads as many of the bikes in other threads, lovers, haters, and those who have no business mentioning anything because their comments reveal to those who actually own the bike recognize the [email protected]#$.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your review, im a slow rider who likes to take my time while i ride, I think this is the perfect bike for me.


----------



## Marty van de Korput (Dec 16, 2017)

Hi,

Last week I bought myself a Full Stache 8 (2019 model) to explore Toscany and the Italian Alps next summer. I also plan on riding the Mill Man Trail in Luxemburg with this bike.

I don't have a lot of experience with setting up a full suspension bike, so I used Trek's suspension calculator. When I setup the suspension according to the calculator, I have the feeling that the suspension is too pluche. I have to say that I normally ride on a carbon hardtail fat bike with a carbon (non-suspension) fork, so maybe this is something that I have to get used to. But during the first ride I had a strong feeling that I lost a lot of energy in the suspension.

I'm 98 kg (216 lbs) and for my weight Trek suggests the following settings:

Front:
- Spring 113 PSI
- Rebound 7 clicks out
- Fork Sag 19 mm

Rear:
- Spring 240 PSI
- Reboud 5 clicks out
- Shock Stroke 52.5 mm
- Shock Sag 15 mm

When I setup the suspension with the suggested air pressure (measured with a digital RockShox pump), I see that I have quite a bit more Sag both front and rear then the suggested 19 mm and 15 mm.

I was wondering if you have experience and some advice for setting up the Full Stache correctly. I also would be interested to see which settings you use compared to Trek's suggestions.

On my first ride I've set the tire pressure on 16 PSI, which felt about right. Again I'm used to ride a fat bike of course. I was surprised about the amount of grip the XR4 tires provide, knowing that I'm used to 4.8" Jumbo Jim's.

Thanks in advance for your help!

Marty


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

Marty van de Korput said:


> Last week I bought myself a Full Stache 8


The only answer that really works is to make small adjustments, ride some, adjust a little more, ride more, then when you can't think of a reason to adjust any further, don't.


----------



## AK Clyde (Sep 10, 2018)

*Suspension set up*

Im 260lb so my pressures are higher (im off their chart), but I still run more sag than suggested. I look at the full stache as more of an off road cadilac. My prefered trails are very rooty animal trail single tracks. The plushness makes them rideable. Id take it out on some rough trail before adding more air. As suggested above, adding just a few pounds at a time (10) then testing. Tire pressure can make a difference too. Are you running tubeless? I run mine pretty squishy to absorb roots, just at the edge where the tires squirm a bit in a turn. Im looking at the CushCore tire insert to help reduce the squirm. 
If I was going to take it on a longer multi day xc trail ride Id add air to both shocks and tires. My shock pump is always with me when riding.


----------



## Kevin Van Deventer (Jan 31, 2015)

Although I have no interest in riding one of these I do have a interest in seeing someone put a set of 200mm rotors and some Trickstuff Maxima brakes and see the rotors melt.


----------



## Marty van de Korput (Dec 16, 2017)

AK Clyde said:


> Im 260lb so my pressures are higher (im off their chart), but I still run more sag than suggested. I look at the full stache as more of an off road cadilac. My prefered trails are very rooty animal trail single tracks. The plushness makes them rideable. Id take it out on some rough trail before adding more air. As suggested above, adding just a few pounds at a time (10) then testing. Tire pressure can make a difference too. Are you running tubeless? I run mine pretty squishy to absorb roots, just at the edge where the tires squirm a bit in a turn. Im looking at the CushCore tire insert to help reduce the squirm.
> If I was going to take it on a longer multi day xc trail ride Id add air to both shocks and tires. My shock pump is always with me when riding.


Out of curiosity, what are the settings you used to setup your suspension? I indeed have setup my tires tubeless. 16 PSI feels good, but changing the suspension, might also require different tire pressure I assume.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

roughster said:


> I'm 6'1" and 225-230 (depending on what I ate/drank the night before). I also ride my bikes pretty hard with drops, jumps, and rough trails.
> 
> Should I be worried about the rear triangle on the new 2020? I really want a 29x3.0 designed bike but was hoping it would have 140mm or better yet 150mm travel.
> 
> With 130mm and a potential concern with the rear triangle, especially at my weight and riding style, what do you guys think? Good idea or not?


I'm 245lb's in my birthday suit.

I own a 2019 Trek Full Stache.

I've upgraded brakes to 200mm rotors from and back.

Running Sram Guide RE brakes.

Also installed 780mm bars and 50mm stem.

Upgraded wheels to 32 hole, 76 POE rear hub.

This bike is the most capable bike in my fleet.

It's also my favorite of the lot.

The Bikemag and Guy Kesteven (excuse spelling of surname) reviews, hit the nail on the proverbial head!

It does ride like a 170mm Enduro rig.

The carbon wheels have alleviated the majority of rear tire rubbing on chain.

The rear tire runs so close to the stay that, having such a wide tire... just it compressing under load - may cause tire to rub (on chain).

The short CS and reasonably roomy reach, huge tires and not excessively long wheelbase - make for an exciting, next level experience/ride.

Sent from my HD1900 using Tapatalk


----------



## sleddogg999 (May 8, 2018)

Long time user, first time poster here. 6'.0"/300# rider. I'm needing to upgrade rotors on my 2019 Full Stache and I see on here that some have used 203mm rotors, while others have went to 200mm. From what I can tell the Rockshox website specs 203 as maximum size. I do not see any info on whether fork is post mount or IS standard. I'm assuming that I need a 20mm adapter for 200 or 203 mm. Any info on what parts I need would be appreciated such as longer mounting bolts.

Thanks everyone.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

sleddogg999 said:


> Long time user, first time poster here. 6'.0"/300# rider. I'm needing to upgrade rotors on my 2019 Full Stache and I see on here that some have used 203mm rotors, while others have went to 200mm. From what I can tell the Rockshox website specs 203 as maximum size. I do not see any info on whether fork is post mount or IS standard. I'm assuming that I need a 20mm adapter for 200 or 203 mm. Any info on what parts I need would be appreciated such as longer mounting bolts.
> 
> Thanks everyone.


200 or 203 rotors will work fine.

Sram rotors will be optimum width. Other brands might vary in thickness.

If you use a rotor that's a little thicker, sand down brake pads slightly.

Your stock bolts should work.

203mm rotors would likely require using spacers between caliper and mount.

The 180mm adapter from the front can be used outback for a 200mm rotor setup.

You'll need an appropriate adapter for the front.

Best upgrade I made to bike was going 200mm rotors front and back and then adding Sram Guide RE's.

This mule builds up so much momentum when bombing down the trails that to keep yourself safe, the better brake setup is a must.

Sent from my HD1900 using Tapatalk


----------



## sleddogg999 (May 8, 2018)

Thanks Targnik
All my research so far had been on Trek website and various online retailers. I finally took a look at my bike (have been quarantined) and see that the stock config is 20mm adapters both front and back. I used rockshox Trailhead link to look up my Pike by serial number and it shows min rotor at 160mm. (assume direct mount)

From this I extrapolate that the frame is also 160mm direct mount since both stock rotors are 180mm. From this I gather that I would need to replace the existing 20mm adaptors with 40mm adaptors both the fork(front) and frame(rear) to accomodate the replacement 200mm Sram rotors.

Are you implying that I can simply stack the 2 20mm adapters instead of using one 40 mm adapter on the rear of the frame? 

On a seperate but still related observation, I wonder as I look at the available adapters if it is an industry standard to label adapter sizes to indicate for the increase needed to reach certain rotor targets from baseline (direct mount). The increase from a 180mm to a 200mm is 20 so add 20mm of adapter SIZEwhich actually moves the caliper out 10mm (half of the added diameter). I guess I need to find a ruler with mm to know how tall these 20mm adapters actually are. Adapters also don't seem to be same rise on both posts so they likely aim to move the centerline of the caliper out by the 10mm, not each leg.


----------



## Drambuie (Mar 27, 2012)

Hi all,
I just picked up a 2020 Full Stache today.
It's my first full suspension bike and I can't wait to take it out.
Does anyone know what size fork mount I would need?
By fork mount, I mean something like this:
https://www.jensonusa.com/Rockymounts-Loball-Bike-Mount

I keep a 2x12 in the bed of my truck with 3 fork mounts but the Stache axle is totally different than the standard mounts.
The store didn't have one and I forgot to ask about the size.

Thanks in advance for the advice!
Brian
NJ
USA


----------



## Freddy_G (Jul 27, 2016)

Drambuie said:


> Hi all,
> I just picked up a 2020 Full Stache today.
> It's my first full suspension bike and I can't wait to take it out.
> Does anyone know what size fork mount I would need?
> ...


Congrats on a awesome bike!

The fork on the Stache uses thru-axel 15 x 110 (not QR used on the mount you linked to).

This kind of mount would work:
https://www.jensonusa.com/Rockymounts-Hotrod-Thru-Axle-Bike-Mount

// Freddy


----------



## Drambuie (Mar 27, 2012)

Thanks Freddy, 
This is very helpful!
My plan is to find a way to safely secure the bike without having to remove the front wheel for when I am alone.
Honda Ridgeline bed is not too big and my bed cover takes up space even when rolled up.
But I think I can make it work on an angle.

But if I'm carrying 2 or 3 bikes, it's easy and safe to use the fork mounts.
Thanks again!
Brian


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

Here's my FS8 setup just so...

Custom bits:
*Carbon 32 hole hoops
*50mm stem
*800mm Giant Contact handlebars
*28t Oval Chainring
*Guide RE brakes
*200mm brake rotors
*Chromag grips

PS - am thinking of getting a DHRII 3.0 for the front. Wintery trail conditions got me thinking about more grip up front. Current grip levels are fine. But, it's a want rather than a need. Apparently, the DHRII in 3" guise - doesn't weigh a lot more, rolls pretty quickly and measures up true to size 

PSS - tis the most capable bike I own 










Sent from my HD1900 using Tapatalk


----------



## LNG 31 (Sep 12, 2020)

*Trek Stache line is discontinued*

I talked to Trek customer service asking about 2021 Full Stache. Unfortunately, Trek has discontinued the Stache line for 2021. Based on the customer service rep the only way to bring back Stache is contacting customer service and asking them not to discontinue the Stache line. If you like Trek Stache bikes please contact Trek customer service.


----------

