# 6' 380 lb need bike sugestions



## nazer81 (Jul 26, 2016)

Hi, I am down to 380 lb from 440 lb. I have been walking and eating right. I want to get into a active hobby. I am looking for a trail bike that will hold up for me. I went to my LBS and looked at some Rockhoppers. They told me they can order a stiffer spring for the front fork since it was depressing it too much.

I just started looking at bikes. What brands/models would be recommended for someone my size to get into beginner trails with? I am looking at preferably staying under $1000.

Is coil shocks or air recommended? 29 or 650b?

Thanks for the input.


----------



## watts888 (Oct 2, 2012)

At 380 pounds, you're pushing the limit of an air shock. Coil spring, even an x-firm one would barely work. Very high risk of damaging the fork and stripping the threads holding the shock coil in. If those go, you're shooting a spring straight at your face/shoulder at a high speed. Honestly, I'd look at riding a rigid bike with a steel fork for a little while to get the weight down to the 320-340lb range. Once you get below that, air forks should work better. They'll still be maxed out, but they'll work at least. Wheels will be similar. You can get some 36H wheels, but they'll still be pushed pretty hard. I'd say the first set of wheels you buy will probably get torn up within the first 6 months of use. Get a strong 8-speed freewheel hub. Absolutely, no matter what, stay away from anything 7-speed.

If you want to stay on smooth trails, without a lot of elevation change, rocks, roots. Basically, smooth dirt paths and crushed gravel. I'd start with a rigid steel fork, 26" tire bike with at least a 3x8 drivetrain (3x9 and 3x10 are good too). In time, the fork could be upgraded to an air fork and everything else stays the same.

Troll | Bikes | Surly Bikes
https://www.specialized.com/us/en/bikes/fitness/roll-elite/106882

There are times that it's worth it to work with your bike shop to get a custom built bike. Order the frame, fork, and wheels you need for your riding needs. Everything else will work for just about any bike.


----------



## NYrr496 (Sep 10, 2008)

I was going to suggest a Surly Krampus or a fat bike.

9:ZERO:7 Whiteout AL GX-10

These are still on sale also.


----------



## KidCharlemagne (Dec 11, 2012)

I'm formerly 420#, now bouncing between 240-250, so I have absolutely been where you are. I didn't start riding at 420 pounds, but I did at around 290. 

There's a strong correlation between durability and cost, at least in the low and mid range price range for bikes (i.e., up to $5,000 for a fully built model). The less you're willing or able to spend, the faster you will break stuff. Trashing a couple wheels and a low-end front fork could result in $500+ of repairs to a $1,000 bike over the course of a single season. 

It is definitely worth paying up for higher end stuff up front when you are at a relatively normal weight. You'll probably break even some higher end stuff at 380#, but I would think you'd go through higher end parts at a lower rate so you could still end up saving money over the longer term by spending more up front. 

I might suggest a road bike as a better starter option for you until you get down to 280 or below. You're not going to be giving a road bike the big hits that will cause you to blow out suspension components the way you will with a mountain bike at that weight. If you start with road biking and then move into mountain biking as you get lighter, you'll probably break less stuff when you do take up mountain biking, and the lower repair budget will help you have enough money to buy a better bike when you do buy that mountain bike. 

Road bikes will also enable you to manage your cardio and aerobic workouts more effectively than a mountain bike, where you're not necessarily moving as regularly as you would be on the road. Lots more start and stop mean it's not a great way to burn calories. I view mountain biking as more a balance and flexibility workout for my whole body and an upper body strength workout, due to the difficulty of muscling a bike over the bumps. And while I burn more calories per mile due to terrain and steeper hills, the cardio/aerobic workout on the road bike gets me in better basic physical shape. I ride with a heart rate monitor and when my heart rate slips below my targeted range, I just push my legs harder. It's easy to make minute changes like that on a road bike; harder to do on a mountain bike. 

You'll still have a problem with banging up wheels on a road bike, but you may well do better on other components, and most importantly, there won't be any suspension to break. Hell, I have a problem with wheels at 240; I have broken a spoke around every 500 miles with the current bike and am considering moving, as the earlier commenter suggested for you, to a 48 spoke rear wheel myself, just because the possibility of wheel failures that could end my day early really, really piss me off.

Another idea: if you are absolutely sure your destiny is on trails and never on the road, consider a fat bike. I ride a Felt DD30, which is built like a tank. The fat tires soak up more of the bumps than a mountain bike, so you don't necessarily need a suspension. The felt is $2,000 list but you may be able to find it for a bit less. There are an increasing number of rigid fat bikes for between $1,000 and $2,000.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

48 spoke wheel? What kind of wheels and roads are you riding at 240 pounds that are breaking spokes every 500 miles? I'm 265 riding 24 spokes on a gravel bike that sees some nasty pot hole riddled wash board covered rutted out dirt and gravel roads and they have been perfect for nearly 1000 miles now. I've also been riding road bikes on pavement from 320 pounds on 28h wheels for 1000's of miles over the past 4-5 years and not a single spoke failure. Full rigid mountain biking in WV...home of the root and rock gardens. No problems. One of us must be doing something wrong.


----------



## nazer81 (Jul 26, 2016)

I think I am going to cough up some cash and buy a fat bike. I want to stay under $2000 perfectly closer to 1500 if possible. Any thoughts on Specialized Fat Boy or Trek Farley 5?


----------



## watts888 (Oct 2, 2012)

Both are OK, and I think you'd be happy with the Trek Farley or the Fatboy SE. I don't think the higher priced Fatboy is worth it though. Carbon fork isn't that big of a deal to a big rider.

If you have a chance, check out a surly dealer. They carry a fatbike called the ice cream truck (and I think a cheaper version called the ICT black ops with 3.8" tires). Steel frame, which might be more comfortable, plus the fork uses a 150mm thru-axle instead of the 135QR. QR hubs are normally weaker in comparison to a thru-axle (at least they are on my fatbike), and on a fork, it's very noticable. Especially when braking.

Ice Cream Truck | Bikes | Surly Bikes


----------



## nazer81 (Jul 26, 2016)

watts888 said:


> Both are OK, and I think you'd be happy with the Trek Farley or the Fatboy SE. I don't think the higher priced Fatboy is worth it though. Carbon fork isn't that big of a deal to a big rider.
> 
> If you have a chance, check out a surly dealer. They carry a fatbike called the ice cream truck (and I think a cheaper version called the ICT black ops with 3.8" tires). Steel frame, which might be more comfortable, plus the fork uses a 150mm thru-axle instead of the 135QR. QR hubs are normally weaker in comparison to a thru-axle (at least they are on my fatbike), and on a fork, it's very noticable. Especially when braking.
> 
> Ice Cream Truck | Bikes | Surly Bikes


I will look for Surly dealer near me and check them out.

Right now I am leaning towards the Trek Farley due to hydro brakes. The 5 has rear thru axle. If I upgrade to the 7 it has tru-axles in front and rear. Are these really going to make a difference for a big rider? Farley 7 is @2400 MSRP. Feel like I am spending too much on a starter bike at this point, but I just want to enjoy riding and have the ability to be rough on the bike if needed. I do not want to be limited to only smooth roads and trails.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Thru axle up front is a huge difference. Back not so much.


----------



## KidCharlemagne (Dec 11, 2012)

Nubster said:


> 48 spoke wheel? What kind of wheels and roads are you riding at 240 pounds that are breaking spokes every 500 miles?


Trek road bike wheels. Love the bike, hate the wheels.  I hear enough people (all skinnier than me) say that Trek is notorious for weaker wheels than the other large bike companies. Word is that you have to spend $7,500 or more these days to get hand-built wheels from the "big 4" (Specialized, Trek, Cannondale, Giant).

I have broken zero spokes on my fat bike despite pounding the wheels on trails. And I rode my old 1980 Ritchey mountain bike (pre-dates mass production machines) for about 10,000 miles including lots of loaded touring and never once broke a spoke on it.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Hmmm...I bought and used with great success a set of H Son Plus Arch Types from a shop on ebay for pretty cheap. Laced to Shimano 105's and they were great wheels. I want to say $250ish. I've never ridden Trek but I never had an issue with Specialized or Cannondale stuff.


----------



## watts888 (Oct 2, 2012)

nazer81 said:


> Feel like I am spending too much on a starter bike at this point, but I just want to enjoy riding and have the ability to be rough on the bike if needed. I do not want to be limited to only smooth roads and trails.


I hate to say it, but at 380lbs, unless you spend a lot on wheels, you're going to destroy wheels. Not just the spokes, but the hubs too. Most hubs are not built to withstand the amount of power you're going to put them too. They use a ratchet system inside that relies on 3 small metal pawls to support all the power you're going to put down. One of the reasons you've probably heard about DT Swiss hubs. If you look at the hub engagement system for a 3-pawl Shimano hub vs. a 18 point engagement DT Swiss hub, you'll see why DT Swiss is the preferred big boy hub. Until you get under 300lbs, most beginner bike wheels will have issued. Even on the fatbikes above, that's a whole lot of weight on a couple thin metal wires. And in reality, the fatbikes won't be built any "stronger" than a regular bike of similar quality, they just have bigger tires which are more comfortable (and a whole lot of fun). You'll have the same problems on a fatbike as you would on a used 26" mountain bike, it's just more fun to ride a fatbike.

Quite simply, you're a tank. You need tank parts. Did you ever see the videos of Jay Leno's tank engine in a car? It wasn't a simple drop in motor swap. Lots of strong parts were needed to put it all together. Looks like fun though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blastolene_Special


----------



## yeti187 (Nov 3, 2005)

cheaper option for a mountain bike would be an older used freeride hard tail and probably upgrading the wheels. Usual buying options are: cheap, light and strong - pick 2. As a starter bike, I'd recommend finding a used hardtail, preferably one that comes with decent wheels and either cheapie brakes you can upgrade or nice hydraulics. There are plenty of DH rims from several years ago that will hold up fine (sun MTX welded with eyelets, arrow DHX). For hubs, I've never had a problem with Hadley hubs and I'm 340 geared up. You can find used 36 holes versions on ebay for cheap since there's very few newer 36h rims for mountain biking. 32h should work as well but would require more maintenance. If you get a good custom built wheelset you should be ok. Machine built sets will likely fail on you because they use cheaper spokes, no thread lock, and only do standard lacing. If you get a larger flange hub with larger spoke holes ask for DT swiss alpine 3 spokes or at min 14g straight with brass nipples. You might want to consider 4x wheel in the back ift he hub will accommodate. For a front fork, an older marzocchi can use heavier weight oil for heavy weight riders but coils have a limit and will be hard to find now that air springs are common. Older freeride hardtails will likely come with heavy duty wheels and cranks and should be sub $700 for a good condition one. Buy cheapie, use and abuse, figure out what you want to upgrade to down the road.

I'm 340 geared up and ride a GG megatrail. I have a lyric up front and vivid coil in the back. I'm going to get these tuned for my weight from dirtlabs since my weight is outside of normal design range. I had custom coils made for the rear shock made by Pohl springworks out of Oregon. I run MK3s laced to I9 hubs and atlas cranks and bars on my trail rig. I also run saint 8" brakes on it. Good brakes and wheels make riding more enjoyable.

Tubeless tire set up is also very good for a Clydesdale rider in rocky terrain. I've run ghetto tubeless and split tube well. If you don't have rims designed for tubeless perhaps split tube would work better to prevent burping for a big guy taking corners.

I also have a surly ice cream truck as a fat bike that I'd recommend as a clyde+ ride.

I've got a surly long haul trucker for road trips that works well without the normal flex of aluminum road bikes under someone my size.


----------



## avidthrasher (Jan 27, 2016)

Wheels are definitely important, but I'll let you in on a little secret about the people who are always complaining about weak wheels and issues breaking spokes/destroying wheelsets; they don't ride as well as they let on. They aren't nearly as smooth as they would tell you they are on the internet and likely cause most of the damage by depending on the great advances in suspension and many other aspects of modern MTBs to smooth things out for them rather than picking a proper line. Everybody loves to get rowdy, but that doesn't mean it's your wheels fault that you broke 3 spokes when you wedged your front wheel between two baby heads and otb'd because you picked a bad line. 

Unless you're a huge dude (I used to be there... and still rarely did more than blow out cheap hubs) you are fine on average/decent wheels. Quality wheels should hold up to be passed on from one bike to the next if they are truly quality and you aren't a massacre on wheels when riding. Also, don't cheap on out cheap spokes. You get what you pay for. But decent and/or quality wheels should be using quality spokes.


----------



## Whacked (Sep 29, 2008)

All good points to consider however it all boils down to how you ride.
Expect to break stuff.

I prefer to sit & spin and have done well with a entry-level 29er
the spring fork was crap but dealt with it until I lost some weight. I have since replaced it with a air fork 
I have cracked a frame doing nothing but JRA (just riding along). Being a big guy without even trying you are putting a lot of force into the bike.

Case in Point: while at the LBS the owner/mechanic showed me a sheared off non-drive crank arm. The owner did nothing but ride around town and is mentally handicapped so you know he wasn't rough on things.
So yea, expect to break things.
regarding my cracked frame, Diamondback replaced with a new bike instead of a frame.

I would look at steel frames. aluminum is stiff, steel flexes.
I would also look at gravel and cyclecross bikes, maybe leaning more towards CX bikes. the CX gearing over a road bike will be a huge benefit. I still walk some hills and I have a compact crank on my road bike.


----------



## avidthrasher (Jan 27, 2016)

I would definitely throw my hat into the "look at CX & Gravel Grinders" category while fitness is your primary goal. There are loads of great entry level options in this regard and layout of both of these bikes is going to serve you better for road pedaling than a MTB while allowing you to ride off road a bit when you feel like it.


----------



## Muirenn (Jun 17, 2013)

I'm going to suggest something like the Specialized Roll (not the low-entry model). It's made for riders your size, and you could take it on light paths and pavement. The riding position would allow you to sit up more, and it's within budget.

https://www.specialized.com/us/en/bikes/fitness/roll-comp-x1/116180

If you don't like that idea, I think upping the budget to a minimum of $1500.00 and going for a Salsa Vaya or Salsa Fargo would achieve a similar riding position, but be more of an offroad adventure bike and gravel grinder, and work through multiple years of riding.

Kind of think it's a good idea to start with the bike that is within budget, and will be ridden the most. As a beginner, upright and comfortable should do that. Maybe later add to the fleet.


----------



## Muirenn (Jun 17, 2013)

nazer81 said:


> I will look for Surly dealer near me and check them out.
> 
> Right now I am leaning towards the Trek Farley due to hydro brakes. The 5 has rear thru axle. If I upgrade to the 7 it has tru-axles in front and rear. Are these really going to make a difference for a big rider? Farley 7 is @2400 MSRP. Feel like I am spending too much on a starter bike at this point, but I just want to enjoy riding and have the ability to be rough on the bike if needed. I do not want to be limited to only smooth roads and trails.


Ah, I just saw this. Since you've increased the budget, an all-steel sturdy bike with no suspension fork like the Salsa Fargo or Salsa Vaya are worth looking into, especially since they are very upright. The handlebars can always be changed for a different style. Or a Surly. Of the Surlys, I think the Ogre might be the most upright.

Ogre | Bikes | Surly Bikes

The Salsa Deadwood is their midfat bike, and is very upright. If you can find one to demo, might be a good option:

DEADWOOD X9 | Bikes | Salsa Cycles


----------



## avidthrasher (Jan 27, 2016)

Yes, if upping your budget a bit I'd look more to the some of those rugged steal frames mentioned as the compliance of a good steel frame makes a good difference in the ride. If you're liking the look of the fat bikes, though, they are going to give a more supple ride feel just because of their tire/wheel dimensions. The fat bikes are gonna be a little more forgiving when you roll up over a square curb when bombing through town too. The "float" effect that fat bikes gives over the terrain is really fun and encourages you to push faster and harder because you can easily see & feel it smoothing things out. Idk where you live and what city streets are like but up in the Northeast we still have a ton of cobblestone and brick roads. The difference in smoothness & comfort when riding over that sort of thing on a standard skinny/mid tired commuter vs. a fat bike is a good example of how the fat bike can be a lot more fun for in town bombing. Gliding over those streets where while hammering down the pedals on my fat bike is vastly different from the groans I get from my lower back on my previous commuter bike which was just my old GT Zaskar converted to an in town pedaler. 

I know modern fat bike vs. old school 90s XC race bike isn't much of a fair comparison as far as comfort goes, but just the way they each handle the terrain of city pedaling is greatly different. On the fat bike you can just roll up steps, curbs, whatever where as on the GT it was still being sure to pick the front end up over every curb or worry about flatting a tire/rim with the 700c wheels. Basically I enjoy the fat bike for plowing fast and being kinda lazy when it comes to technical skills.


----------



## nazer81 (Jul 26, 2016)

I think I have narrowed it down to the Trek Farley 7 or the Framed Alaskan Carbon. I do not have a Framed dealer anywhere near me but I can order it on online $600 cheaper than buying a Farley 7 at a store. Is carbon strong enough for someone of my weight or is alloy stronger?


----------



## Muirenn (Jun 17, 2013)

Carbon is stronger than aluminum.

I'd normally say stay away from online ordering for a first bike, but the framed appears to be a lot more upright than the Farley. Stack isn't listed, but the head tube is much higher on the framed, relative to effective top tube, than on the Farley. The only caveat is to make sure to get the carbon fork, not the suspension fork.


----------



## Muirenn (Jun 17, 2013)

Here is a very basic article on carbon fiber strength.

Carbon Fiber: Peeling Back the Layers | Bicycling


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

I'd maybe stay away from carbon cockpit parts for a while...but the frame will be fine. Thomson seatposts will be your best friend. I've never had issues with any other aluminum parts like stems or handlebars. But the seatpost...you want something proven IMO and for heavies, Thomson is proven.


----------



## nazer81 (Jul 26, 2016)

Nubster said:


> I'd maybe stay away from carbon cockpit parts for a while...but the frame will be fine. Thomson seatposts will be your best friend. I've never had issues with any other aluminum parts like stems or handlebars. But the seatpost...you want something proven IMO and for heavies, Thomson is proven.


I will definitely look into a Thomson post.

I called the house and they advised me to not buy either of their Carbon or Alloy frames from them, saying neither will hold my weight. I think they are just going by the manufacturer specs and not common sense that the bikes can hold me if I ride them with grace.

Their Alloy has QR back hub. To get front and back thru axles you have to buy the carbon. If the frame and forks will hold up, I will buy their cheap stock wheels and skip the carbon wheel upgrade. When the stock alloy wheels fail, I will have a local shop build me a custom set of wheels that can hold me.

Any Alaskan Carbon owners that weigh 350+ by chance? The Farley 7 is alloy with thru axles front and back. I'd be out $2500 for a stock Farley 7. With the Alaskan Carbon I can get it for $1900 and put the money saved into custom wheels and other parts like a stronger seat post.

Another question I have since I do not have a Framed bike dealer near me. Do bikes shops generally do work on other branded bikes that they do not carry?


----------



## Muirenn (Jun 17, 2013)

The Alaskan does sound like a good possibility, but the steel Surly's are proven for someone in your range. Have you had a chance to look into them? I know there aren't as many Surly and Salsa dealers as Trek. But 2 grand is a lot to spend on a bike if it doesn't work out. It's worthwhile to take your time and try bikes until you are sure you've found the right one. 

Also: steel. Not sure how much you know about frame materials, but steel is smooth and comfortable. You may be picturing something a lot less refined than I actually is. I've 2 steel bikes, ozone carbon, one aluminum. They are all high quality, comfortable framesets. Aluminum and carbon are inherently more brittle, that also makes steel a good choice. 

One other thing. Riding for a year makes people a lot stronger, and changes the way you ride. There is a greater difference when someone is determined to change body composition. The bike you need now isn't the same as the one you may need a year or two from now. The steel bikes are built to be a lot more multi-purpose than bikes like the Farley or Alaskan. And you can benefit from them through more iterations of these changes. 

JMTC. And, on the other hand, I read an article stating the Alaskan is overbuilt, which is good. It also said power transfer through the rear chain stays was weak, which isn't so good.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

I'd contact Framed and ask about weight limits. They are usually conservative so you can judge for yourself if they have a weight limit. Most frames that I've ever seen except the really light race frames don't have limits. Sometimes components including wheels do however.

Also consider warranty. Framed doesn't have a very good one from what I can see and is only for 3 years.


----------

