# Bike for a fat guy



## endyg (Mar 5, 2018)

I'm 6'2 and about 315. Wanted to know everyone's suggestions on a new bike that would support my weight. As in new I mean I don't mind ordering a brand new bike. Not looking to spend a fortune, but would pay between 1-2k. 

It would mostly be for comfort for now. I have bike path's/trails around my house. I would prefer a mountain bike or something that is more relaxing to ride so I don't have to hunch down.

I'm having a real hard time finding anything that suggests certain models online, so I'm reaching out!

Thanks in advance!


----------



## DeeGee68 (Feb 21, 2017)

I would consider a hard tail for the type of riding you are describing. With that said, you can get a solid bike for the price range. Take a look at a Specialized Rockhopper or a similar bike.


----------



## Ross1200 (Mar 27, 2014)

I was 285 6'3" when i started riding. Started on a specialized rockhopper. While it was a great bike, and i learned a lot about upgrading parts and doing work to it myself, I wish i had had the money initially to put into something better. 

Id say either somethink like an on one or cotic hardtail or something like a surly ecr would suit your needs and both can come in the 1k-2k budget. Get a strong set of wheels and you should be good to go. 

I rode an onone parkwood 29er for ages, Now i ride a cotic single speed 29er. Both have been great and both have been good with customer service in my experience (though onone can be a bit rough and go on that).

A nice steel frame and strong wheels. A good hardtail will suit. 

Where are you based? 

Sent from my LG-H930 using Tapatalk


----------



## JackalopeRider (Jun 16, 2013)

I am 6'2" 300(losing rapidly  ). I have a couple mtn bikes and I pretty much feel like you. I love the bikes but never like leaning so far forward. I Just ordered a riser bar for my 2017 Diamond back Mason Comp and am hoping it will help a little. Decent bike for the money. It is a 27.5+ bike so you get a little more cush with the fatter tires so it is a little easier on the butt. In the link is a 2018 mason 2

https://www.ebay.com/itm/New-2018-D...hash=item2cd02ad3b3:m:mK9C9_SSnyCATycoyo4U8_g


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

I work in a shop, and hear this frequently. Truthfully, a mountain bike will have a bit of a hunched down riding position. To me it sounds like you're looking for something more like a hybrid or comfort-ish bike. Please correct me if I am off base here. 

If you're truly wanting to ride bike paths rather than true mountain bike trails, and are looking to be comfortably upright, be who you are and get the right bike for the job. There are plenty of good bikes made for what you describe without you having to use a mountain bike for something it won't really excel at.

If you came into the shop I work at, I'd have you try several bikes, but would definitely have you look at/ride the Specialized Roll before making a decision. The Roll Elite if you need more than one chainring up front, or the Roll X1 if you only need one chainring. I think you would appreciate the riding position of those bikes over the geometry of a mountain bike for the riding you describe.


----------



## JackalopeRider (Jun 16, 2013)

jeffj said:


> I work in a shop, and hear this frequently. Truthfully, a mountain bike will have a bit of a hunched down riding position. To me it sounds like you're looking for something more like a hybrid or comfort-ish bike. Please correct me if I am off base here.
> 
> If you're truly wanting to ride bike paths rather than true mountain bike trails, and are looking to be comfortably upright, be who you are and get the right bike for the job. There are plenty of good bikes made for what you describe without you having to use a mountain bike for something it won't really excel at.
> 
> If you came into the shop I work at, I'd have you try several bikes, but would definitely have you look at/ride the Specialized Roll before making a decision. The Roll Elite if you need more than one chainring up front, or the Roll X1 if you only need one chainring. I think you would appreciate the riding position of those bikes over the geometry of a mountain bike for the riding you describe.


I Don't agree with conventional "Bike Shop" Wisdom at all and never have. I have been riding and racing since the early 80's until 2012 when I blew my knee out(then got fat) on a motocross race. This was something that always bugged me when I went into the bike shops were folks telling me how it worked or what I actually wanted. There are a few analogies that I believe make a great example of that, BMX bikes, Trials bikes and Dirt bikes. It is completely possible to build a true off road machine that has a more upright position. I know your comment was not directed towards me necessarily but Someone wanting a mtn bike to hit actual trails and a little more upright posture is not ubsurd(especially if they have a gut) and can perform well. Does it fit the current Glove of the mountian bike hand, No. But I think there is a huge Market for this. Like you said you hear this often at your shop where you work, It is not because folks want a Path bike either, It is because they want a Mtn bike with a little more of a upright seating position like they asked.

I looked up the "roll" and it is by no means a bike to take on any sort of trail other than a dirt path or pavement

I think a few bike makers are catching on, Looking at what SE has done with the big BMX machines including the DUO 27.5 makes me believe this. It is getting there but not there just yet.

If I wasn't 8 years form retirement myself I would be thinking about designing a bike to fit this notch in the market. It would sell.

EDIT:: Re read my reply to you. I by no means are jumping you as you were being helpful. It just brought a thought I have frequently had.


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

endyg said:


> I'm 6'2 and about 315. Wanted to know everyone's suggestions on a new bike that would support my weight. As in new I mean I don't mind ordering a brand new bike. Not looking to spend a fortune, but would pay between 1-2k.
> 
> It would mostly be for comfort for now. I have bike path's/trails around my house. I would prefer a mountain bike or something that is more relaxing to ride so I don't have to hunch down.
> 
> ...





JackalopeRider said:


> I Don't agree with conventional "Bike Shop" Wisdom at all and never have. I have been riding and racing since the early 80's until 2012 when I blew my knee out(then got fat) on a motocross race. This was something that always bugged me when I went into the bike shops were folks telling me how it worked or what I actually wanted. There are a few analogies that I believe make a great example of that, BMX bikes, Trials bikes and Dirt bikes. It is completely possible to build a true off road machine that has a more upright position. I know your comment was not directed towards me necessarily but Someone wanting a mtn bike to hit actual trails and a little more upright posture is not ubsurd(especially if they have a gut) and can perform well. Does it fit the current Glove of the mountian bike hand, No. But I think there is a huge Market for this. Like you said you hear this often at your shop where you work, It is not because folks want a Path bike either, It is because they want a Mtn bike with a little more of a upright seating position like they asked.
> 
> I looked up the "roll" and it is by no means a bike to take on any sort of trail other than a dirt path or pavement
> 
> ...


No offense taken unless you were implying that I would tell him what bike to buy. That's not my style. I would show him everything available. I have even told customers about bikes we don't sell.

I was trying to say that even though many customers have an idea of what they think they want/need before coming into the shop, I am more inclined to implore them to keep an open mind and try out a few different styles so that preconceived notions of what some bikes might be like without riding them first wouldn't keep them from getting the right bike.

I took his post to mean that he wants a bike that is beefy enough to support him while he rides bike paths in a more upright position.

It is possible that we're not sure exactly what he means by 'trail'. If he means an actual mountain bike trail, then I would have a different recommendation. If he is saying what I think he is actually saying, I still think he should absolutely look at the Roll.

If they really want what they feel they want, it's their money and they need to be happy with their choice. I am a full time teacher, and work part time in a bike shop because I enjoy it. Helping people get the bike they want is what I like best about it even if it means them getting it somewhere else. .

Perhaps the OP could clarify further what he means by bike path and bike trail.


----------



## JackalopeRider (Jun 16, 2013)

You could be 100% accurate with your thoughts after re-reading myself  And potentially great advice at that


----------



## adam.cvanwinkle (Mar 6, 2018)

I’d look at a rigid fat bike, no suspension to quit on you, extra tire volume for cushion. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## endyg (Mar 5, 2018)

Thanks for all of the advice guys! I'm in Michigan in the U.S. I'll do some research with all of this and post back when I buy a bike. I've got a huge park about 2 or 3 miles from my house. For the most part it is all paved. I plan on getting into a mountain bike when I lose some weight. 

I have a feeling bending like that isn't going to feel very good for an extended period of time, so yeah, I am looking more for a hybrid/relaxed ride right now.


----------



## adam.cvanwinkle (Mar 6, 2018)

endyg said:


> Thanks for all of the advice guys! I'm in Michigan in the U.S. I'll do some research with all of this and post back when I buy a bike. I've got a huge park about 2 or 3 miles from my house. For the most part it is all paved. I plan on getting into a mountain bike when I lose some weight.
> 
> I have a feeling bending like that isn't going to feel very good for an extended period of time, so yeah, I am looking more for a hybrid/relaxed ride right now.


You can get a relaxed, more upright mountain bike fit, the old XC racer positioning is not very common anymore. 
Also, you bring a large fellow, you may be interested in trying catalyst pedals from Pedaling Innovations. Or other large flat pedals like the jobs wah wah. I've got wide feet and having the wrong pedals makes for sore feet after the ride.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

I'd personally be looking for a nice HT or even rigid with PLUS tyres, you can pick up a decent one in the $1500 range. While I kind of agree with Jeffj's thoughts, I'd still opt for the mountain bike over a hybrid because once you drop some weight and get fitter, you can then easily graduate from bike paths/mutts to proper trails and start to have some fun.

If you maybe just want to get started with something decent, but not blow the budget and maybe put some aside for when you loose weight and maybe want to upgrade to a nice FS, Diamondback has the MASON Trail on sale right now for $750 US. It has on some decent components for a beginner bike, nothing super, but decent and is worthy of being upgraded down the line if you want to keep a HT in the stable. Also, Suntour have an upgrade program that let's you save quite a bit off a new, better fork by trading up on your existing Suntour fork.


----------



## endyg (Mar 5, 2018)

adam.cvanwinkle said:


> You can get a relaxed, more upright mountain bike fit, the old XC racer positioning is not very common anymore.
> Also, you bring a large fellow, you may be interested in trying catalyst pedals from Pedaling Innovations. Or other large flat pedals like the jobs wah wah. I've got wide feet and having the wrong pedals makes for sore feet after the ride.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Any suggestions on model?


----------



## adam.cvanwinkle (Mar 6, 2018)

endyg said:


> Any suggestions on model?


Give me a day to research and I'll get back to you.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Check out some of the bikes at the Surly page. Steel and beefy.


----------



## iliketexmex (Oct 29, 2016)

adam.cvanwinkle said:


> I'd look at a rigid fat bike, no suspension to quit on you, extra tire volume for cushion.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


This. Get a riser bar if you feel hunched. Fat tires are good for everything. It is a little more resistance on pavement but still fun. It's the only bike I ride anymore.


----------



## CRANK! (Jun 11, 2014)

Look up Heller

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## -Todd- (Jun 13, 2011)

adam.cvanwinkle said:


> I'd look at a rigid fat bike, no suspension to quit on you, extra tire volume for cushion.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


This... a Fat bike for a fat guy is a great idea. Forgiving and fun, you will enjoy this more that you can imagine!


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

A couple of things to comment on.

Steel bikes that feel 'lively' and 'compliant' to mere mortals can often times feel like a wallowing wet dishtowel to a 'superclyde'. I am currently within 10lbs of the OP, albeit two whopping inches or so taller. Bikes feel very different to riders that are 'normal' size as opposed to the beefier types among us, especially rigid and to a slightly lesser degree, hardtails.

Being that the OP is at a relatively lonely place on the bell curve of cyclists, unless he is very risk tolerant, I would hesitate before ordering a bike online that he hasn't ridden.

Kona used to make a mountain bike called the 'Hoss' that was made and equipped to better serve clydesdales that are well over the 200lb differentiation point. You might be able to find one in good shape on the used market if mountain bike geometry does indeed appeal to you.

Plus sized hardtails like the Diamondback Mason of the Trek Stache 29+, or a Surly Krampus are worth a look if you want to check them out.

That said, I still don't necessarily advocate buying a bike primarily designed for something other than what you really intend to do with it on the _chance_ that your riding occasionally morphs into that somewhere down the line. I'd get the bike that fits what you primarily want to do with it for the foreseeable future, and worry about what may or may not transpire when it actually transpires.

Of course when you ask mountain bikers what type of bike you should get, we're likely to suggest something of which we know and like best. It's not surprising that when you're a hammer, you tend to see everything as a nail.


----------



## adam.cvanwinkle (Mar 6, 2018)

jeffj said:


> A couple of things to comment on.
> 
> Steel bikes that feel 'lively' and 'compliant' to mere mortals can often times feel like a wallowing wet dishtowel to a 'superclyde'. I am currently within 10lbs of the OP, albeit two whopping inches or so taller. Bikes feel very different to riders that are 'normal' size as opposed to the beefier types among us, especially rigid and to a slightly lesser degree, hardtails.
> 
> ...


I agree with you on your point about making a purchase based on what you might eventually do with the bike, however I'm not sure you'll find a "comfort" or "Hybrid" bike that will be sturdy enough for a Clyde. 
I think a beach cruiser is probably going to be the next in line as far as burliness goes but a rigid fatbike would offer much better versatility.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## adam.cvanwinkle (Mar 6, 2018)

adam.cvanwinkle said:


> Give me a day to research and I'll get back to you.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Here's a quick list of bikes to look at, I'm sure there are many many more and if you can go visit one of these in person absolutely do so!
Fat bikes $2k and under:
Diamondback "El Oso"-$2k (not rigid although I'm sure it could be ordered that way)
Jamis "Roughneck"-$1600
Devinci Minus "RS"-$1680
Rocky Mountain "Blizzard"-$1900
PLUS BIKES:
Smaller but still have extra air volume-
Airborne "Griffin"(27.5+)-$1200
Kona "X-unit"(27.5+)-$1300

I would urge you to call around the local shops and see if they have a fat bike in stock. Don't fret the seat being uncomfortable, that is an item that you should measured and sized for.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## endyg (Mar 5, 2018)

It looks like I might go with a fat bike. It looks like it has the right geometry where I wouldn't necessarily have to be bent over all of the time. If not a fat bike, I would consider a roll to get started. Knowing myself though, I'll push myself and probably want a more aggressive bike after I lose some weight. 

I'll update the thread with what I get to help some other people out.


----------



## leeboh (Aug 5, 2011)

Look at something like a surly krampus, 29er with 3 " tires.


----------



## endyg (Mar 5, 2018)

By the way, thanks for all of the advice and help! You guys are great!


----------



## adam.cvanwinkle (Mar 6, 2018)

You might be interested in Catalyst flat pedals from Pedaling Innovations. I've had three rides on them and my last one had a good amount of climbing. No knee pain, no low back pain. 
The way you position your foot has you in a more forward position on the bike which will also help with a relaxed rider position.

Just a thought.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## XJman (Mar 5, 2018)

I am a similar size and just picked up a trek stache 5. It's pretty stout and it's pretty comfortable. The dropper post is also great as it gets out of my way if I need to stand off the bike. 

You do lean forward, but not hunching like anroad bike. I've rode about 10 miles so far and my body doesn't really ache outside of normal muscle use stuff. I'd recommend cruising around on one at a shop if you can.


----------



## DocBilly (Jun 3, 2013)

I am a Heavy rider as well. 6.2” 310 pounds. I ride a 20 pound Cannondale Flash Carbon 1, with carbon everything, shock, seatpost, cranks, Lefty, all but wheels, got a set of Stans Arch, DT Swiss 240 hubs. I have ridden this bike for 4 years now. I travel with my bike, been to Crested Butte, Durango, Moab, gave it some serious punishing. Wheels don’t even go out of true. I know its a bit off his bidget but I bought it used for 2500. My 2 cents is that being heavy doesn’t always mean you have to ride a steel frame with plus tires fat bike. We got enough with being plus ourselves!


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

Well, to be frank, I'd call that damn lucky and that's all. No way I would ever recommend something like that for someone of your weight, I put those wheels out of true, easily and I'm only 180lbs and don't consider how I ride "hard" :skep:



DocBilly said:


> I am a Heavy rider as well. 6.2" 310 pounds. I ride a 20 pound Cannondale Flash Carbon 1, with carbon everything, shock, seatpost, cranks, Lefty, all but wheels, got a set of Stans Arch, DT Swiss 240 hubs. I have ridden this bike for 4 years now. I travel with my bike, been to Crested Butte, Durango, Moab, gave it some serious punishing. Wheels don't even go out of true. I know its a bit off his bidget but I bought it used for 2500. My 2 cents is that being heavy doesn't always mean you have to ride a steel frame with plus tires fat bike. We got enough with being plus ourselves!


----------



## str8edgMTBMXer (Apr 15, 2015)

leeboh said:


> Look at something like a surly krampus, 29er with 3 " tires.


this...100%. When I got back into riding about 4 years ago, I was pretty bbig - 6', 300lbs - and got this bike, so I sort have "been through" what you are going through. I also have dropped down to 195lbs after a few years of dieting, BIKE RIDING (YAY!!!) and a heart attack forced me to eat better.

it can start as a comfortable riding "paved trail" bike, and getting a set of jones Loop bars can also help with the more upright riding position, and then, it can become a regular trail bike as you get better at riding and possibly lose some weight. It is like getting 3 bikes in one!

I am VERY GLAD that I got this bike because it changed with me as my riding style and body evolved and changed. I have never felt like I needed another bike


----------



## matt4x4 (Dec 21, 2013)

I think I had an A-HA moment. I've never been too keen on fat bikes myself. I have always thought they were useless, pointless, novelty item. But fat fat tires, gives air cushion.

Next up is winter riding, I find that my front wheel always slid when riding the streets with the snow packed down with vehicle tires. That packed snow would break away causing the front wheel to move. Now I only had 2.10" wide tires on a Townie cruiser with mtb tires on. Rear wheel would not slide around as much. So theres that aspect for winter riding.

Fat tires add air cushioning + a suspension seat post.

Now for us fatter types, me being in the upper half of 300, perhaps even seat posts arent made for us, because nothing i've found for rear suspension will work. The only side note to that is motorcycle shocks and you'd have to figure out mounting. Or mount two bicycle shocks where one normally goes, if possible.

I will look into this all a bit more. For summer cruising, fat bikes are stupid imo.



adam.cvanwinkle said:


> I'd look at a rigid fat bike, no suspension to quit on you, extra tire volume for cushion.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## str8edgMTBMXer (Apr 15, 2015)

matt4x4 said:


> I will look into this all a bit more. For summer cruising, fat bikes are stupid imo.


there is definitely a large demographic on this board that would disagree with this statement!

Many of us ride full rigid fat or plus year 'round. and regardless of terrain. I have read many on here who originally had that mind set, but then tried it, and at least are more open to it. Again, it depends on what you are riding...I would not suggest road racing with fat/+, but many trails in the summer ride just as fun with fat/+ as with regular tire sizes. I can only afford 1 bike, so I ride 29+ everywhere I go. There has not been a terrain yet that the plus size was a "hinderance" to, but again, I don't race.

I definitely see the seat post issue though. I think you will be alright if you don't ride with it too high...I worried about this when I was around 320. I don't use a dropper, and ride with my seat in a "mid height" position right now. (Have not drank the "dropper Kool Aid" yet, but the cup is on the table...).

Personally, I hate the feel of rear suspension, but again, it is because I don't ride in a way where rear suspension is useful. I feel that suspension is not for comfort, but for keeping the wheels in contact with the ground through speed and techy riding situations. tires and legs are your comfort suspension. I always felt that any of the FS bikes I rode forced me to waste energy in climbing and level riding situations...like it was soaking up the power from my pedal strokes...but I don't bomb downhill, or ride at speeds where the rear wheel is bouncing off of the terrain most of the time...if it is, I stiffen up my legs to control it

just some thoughts...not trying to sell you on anythign!!!


----------



## matt4x4 (Dec 21, 2013)

I must try test riding a fat bike from LBS before the snow melts. I should do it tomorrow.


----------



## Muirenn (Jun 17, 2013)

endyg said:


> It looks like I might go with a fat bike. It looks like it has the right geometry where I wouldn't necessarily have to be bent over all of the time. If not a fat bike, I would consider a roll to get started. Knowing myself though, I'll push myself and probably want a more aggressive bike after I lose some weight.
> 
> I'll update the thread with what I get to help some other people out.


Surly trail bikes: karate Monkey with 27.5+ or 29er wheels. Krampus with 29+. Wednesday with fat tires.

Surly Touring mountain bike, think much more stable, less responsive, great all-rounder. Surly Ogre. They keep changing it, I think it takes 29+ or 29, now.

Surly Touring: in between the Trail and Touring: ECR. Stable and responsive.

For Surlys, I'd say Ogre or ECR. But the others are fine, too.

Salsa: Fargo: 29+ upright position, cool drop bars that are kind of splayed. All rounder on-off road. Leans mountain.

Salsa Vaya: All rounder on-off road. Leans road compared to the Fargo. But great anywhere. The Salsa's are more upright than the Surlys. Of the Surlys, the Ogre and ECR are most upright.

The body position on a bike has nothing to do with tire size. Look at the geometry charts, especially stack and reach (and couple with head tube angle and effective top tube).

Salsa Mukluk aluminum. Nice Fatbike for a good price. Aluminum. (All the rest were steel). Geometry is quite upright.

Plus or + bikes tend to have tires around 3" wide. Fat bikes at least 4" wide. Just depends what you like. Both will work.

You should be able to find any of these bikes for < $2K. The Surly Ice Cream Truck nice, but costs more than the rest.


----------

