# Singlespeed or Fatbike



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

Please don't suggest a Singlespeed Fatbike. My knee could not take that. I am making a decision between the two for winter/bad weather riding here in Michigan. 

I know everyone says fatbikes are so fun. I have had a couple and then are fun but it felt like only really necessary for a few rides a winter. Otherwise a nice simple singlespeed was perfect for the late fall/winter/early spring nastiness that is Michigan. Easy to maintain, fun to ride, and versatile in the summer when you want a change of pace from your geared bike...

Am i crazy here or is there just more appeal for the singlespeed for me even though I am not a dedicated singlespeeder?

I already have a brand new Niner SIR 9 frame and components so I have the singlespeed project ready to go.

It's a tough decision but a high class problem. What to do!


----------



## 7daysaweek (May 7, 2008)

I'd go with the ss. I have a ss and a ss fatbike... Maybe the fatbike would be more fun geared but after a while the fun kinda faded and the bike is just cumbersome to ride. It's cool to have for the occasional ride but if I had to pick one I'd go with the ss.


----------



## dbhammercycle (Nov 15, 2011)

It sounds like you've already made up your mind. Why not just ride the Niner and not shift? If you like it, get the conversion kit for the rear hub and drop the derailleurs. You could always try an enabler fork for the front fattie krampus wheel as another trial project. Start with what you have and if it's not enough then go get yourself the fatbike.


----------



## Nakedbabytoes (Jul 24, 2012)

I have both, they both are fun in different ways. But I ride my fattie year round and enjoy the heck outta it....so for me, if I had to cut ties, it would be my SS CX rig vs my Pugs fat bike. I think....oh man, I don't even wanna think about choosing!

















I don't think anybody can really decide that but you. I love my fatbike to death but my SS CXer is easy and does everything well.


----------



## santacruzer (Nov 30, 2004)

Krampus, 1/2 fatbike, full single speed. 25lbs of steamrolling fury. I've been enjoying mine if you can't tell


----------



## J3SSEB (Jun 1, 2009)

Single speed dude. Especially since you already have a great frame.


----------



## Clobber (Jan 13, 2010)

I vote SS. I love both but nothing beats topping a steep climb on a SS. I am going 2.5 knobby rear & 3.0 front. Faster, more agile, equal smiles to fatty. SS is a must for me.


----------



## michaelscott (May 23, 2011)

Ranger Pride said:


> Please don't suggest a Singlespeed Fatbike. My knee could not take that. I am making a decision between the two for winter/bad weather riding here in Michigan.


I am confused by why your knee could not take a SS fatbike.


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

michaelscott said:


> I am confused by why your knee could not take a SS fatbike.


I had ACL replacement and my meniscus was torn on both sides of the knee as well. It does not take much for it to ache and swell up. Something about the Q-factor of the fatbike tends to make it hurt vs a regular mountainbike. Ad in trying to push those heavy tires/wheels with one gear and I don't think the result would be good.


----------



## edubfromktown (Sep 7, 2010)

I'd go SS... I had ACL replacement surgery 10 years ago. Single speed riding hasn't bothered my knee. I also do not like the idea of wider BB on a full fatty bike.

You could always go half fat with a 3.0 Surly Knard tire if you end up with a Niner carbon or steel fork or get a wider fork to accommodate a 3.8" or larger front rim/tire combo. I'm running a Knard on my 2010 SIR. Here's what a 2.35 Nobby Nic (mounted on a Stan's Flow rim), Knard 3.0 mounted on a similar width rim and a 3.8 Larry mounted on a graceful fat sheba w/135mm hub look like.


----------



## Igoreha (Feb 20, 2010)

SS all the way for me. Better than fatbike in most cases: lighter, more agile, better acceleration and handling.


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

edubfromktown said:


> I'd go SS... I had ACL replacement surgery 10 years ago. Single speed riding hasn't bothered my knee. I also do not like the idea of wider BB on a full fatty bike.
> 
> You could always go half fat with a 3.0 Surly Knard tire if you end up with a Niner carbon or steel fork or get a wider fork to accommodate a 3.8" or larger front rim/tire combo. I'm running a Knard on my 2010 SIR. Here's what a 2.35 Nobby Nic (mounted on a Stan's Flow rim), Knard 3.0 mounted on a similar width rim and a 3.8 Larry mounted on a graceful fat sheba w/135mm hub look like.
> 
> View attachment 846439


I like the idea of the biggest tire I can put on the front. I have a Niner Rigid Steel Fork. In the winter our bike paths are plowed but you still get ice on them.


----------



## edubfromktown (Sep 7, 2010)

I've ridden in up to maybe 6" of snow on 2.25" and 2.4" rear tires with no problem. Adding a semi-big fatty on the front clears the way for the rear tire to some extent.

A friend of mine runs studded 2.x" tires and he hasn't blown me away on packed down snowy single track. Sure he has a bit more traction but studs are not nearly as big of an advantage as I expected. Once ice, studs make a big difference.


----------



## serious (Jan 25, 2005)

I don't think you need a fat bike. Unless you ride in fresh snow often, it is a bit of an overkill. You can ride with normal mtb tires on just about any packed snow surface. Even with some light fresh snow, it is no problem. The only time I had trouble with snow is during a race where the snow was fresh and very heavy. It was like riding on sand with the front wheel having a mind of its own.


----------



## phsycle (Apr 14, 2011)

serious said:


> I don't think you need a fat bike. Unless you ride in fresh snow often, it is a bit of an overkill. You can ride with normal mtb tires on just about any packed snow surface. Even with some light fresh snow, it is no problem. The only time I had trouble with snow is during a race where the snow was fresh and very heavy. It was like riding on sand with the front wheel having a mind of its own.


I agree with this. Fatbikes are fun, and make a superb camping/expedition rig. For me, fatbike riding style doesn't suit me well, as I find it just too sluggish. Even with a fat front, I hated the handling. Plus, having a dedicated bike to ride a few times during the year just didn't make sense for me (I refuse to ride that behemoth year-round).

Sweet spot for me is a 2.3-2.4 rear with a Surly Knard up front. Adds some of the plushness of a true fat tire, but doesn't handle like a steamroller either. The current set up also handles packed snow rides just fine, as I have recently had a chance to try out. Just lowered the pressure a bit for the extra traction and I was good to go.


----------



## michaelscott (May 23, 2011)

I am blown away by the overwhelming pro SS comments in this thread.

I looked on google to see if this has ever before happened in the history of internet bike talk and I was directed to this site on wikipedia.

I've also been told that not everything you read on wikipedia is true though- so maybe the OP should ask the same question in the fatbike forums. If they also think he should get a SS bike then it is obviously the correct solution to his problem.


----------



## jetboy23 (Jun 14, 2011)

I think the real question for this specific forum would be...

Should i get a hardtail, full squish, or rigid 26", 27.5, 29er, or fatbike for my next singlespeed bike to ride on roads, fireroads, singletrack, steep loose climbs, or snow? Please tell me what to ride and how to ride it for the best fun you can have in my place. Thank you in advance.


----------



## pulsepro (Sep 13, 2007)

santacruzer said:


> Krampus, 1/2 fatbike, full single speed. 25lbs of steamrolling fury. I've been enjoying mine if you can't tell
> View attachment 846390


I agree completely..... and nice goat!


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

michaelscott said:


> I am blown away by the overwhelming pro SS comments in this thread.
> 
> I looked on google to see if this has ever before happened in the history of internet bike talk and I was directed to this site on wikipedia.
> 
> I've also been told that not everything you read on wikipedia is true though- so maybe the OP should ask the same question in the fatbike forums. If they also think he should get a SS bike then it is obviously the correct solution to his problem.


I kind of got what I expected out of my question but it is fun to read the opinions and the reasons behind them. I should just get one of everything then I would have the ultimate bike stable. Good luck convincing my wife on that idea though!


----------



## J3SSEB (Jun 1, 2009)

This decision is too hard. I would just quit riding.


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

You know you want it and you have to follow N+1 rule for number of bikes you have:


----------



## Drevil (Dec 31, 2003)

It's funny. If you post this question on the fat bike forum, you'll get the same ratio of folks saying to get the fat bike as there are people on this forum saying to get the singlespeed.

Having ridden singlespeeds for a dozen+ years and a fat bike for 1.5 years, I'd pick the fat. It suits my style of riding, but more importantly, it's a helluvalotta fun.


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

Drevil said:


> It's funny. If you post this question on the fat bike forum, you'll get the same ratio of folks saying to get the fat bike as there are people on this forum saying to get the singlespeed.
> 
> Having ridden singlespeeds for a dozen+ years and a fat bike for 1.5 years, I'd pick the fat. It suits my style of riding, but more importantly, it's a helluvalotta fun.


Just looked through those pictures. Nice looking bike at an amazing weight.


----------



## Stevob (Feb 27, 2009)

I've been SS for 7 years, and am looking to buy an On-One Fatty soon. I'll just get the frame/fork/wheelset bundle and build it as a SS.

I love riding my rigid SS, but I want to experience the fun of a fatty. If I were the OP, I'd get the fat bike.


----------



## mattgVT (Nov 9, 2010)

Fat bike.


----------



## buddhak (Jan 26, 2006)

Left hand or right hand...which to sever...


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

4 speed SS fatty with two quick connect chain links:









And go to your LBS and try couple of fatbikes if you never tried one before


----------



## p08757 (Mar 15, 2012)

I've been tossing this question around in my head as well. I'm thinking of of going toward the lower end of a semi-fat and will probably look into building up a Surly 1x1 with 2.75" tires on some 26x50 rims. The only thing stopping me is my wife complaining about how many bikes I have now. N+1=Divorce 

I guess if I retire my old SS and take the parts that I can re-use off that she may let it go......


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

mongol777 said:


> 4 speed SS fatty with two quick connect chain links:


Contradictio in terminis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cool bike!


----------



## dbhammercycle (Nov 15, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> Contradictio in terminis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Cool bike!


I didn't get that either, do you mean dinglespeed Mongol?


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

dbhammercycle said:


> I didn't get that either, do you mean dinglespeed Mongol?


2 cogs at the back and 2 chainrings - 4 speed SS


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

p08757 said:


> I've been tossing this question around in my head as well. I'm thinking of of going toward the lower end of a semi-fat and will probably look into building up a Surly 1x1 with 2.75" tires on some 26x50 rims. The only thing stopping me is my wife complaining about how many bikes I have now. N+1=Divorce
> 
> I guess if I retire my old SS and take the parts that I can re-use off that she may let it go......


N+1 was approved in my household via involving missus into the sport. My moonie is still being built (will be fixed) - this 4 speed SS was built for her

19 and 22 at the back; 36 and 22 in the front


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

J.B. Weld said:


> Contradictio in terminis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Cool bike!


Thanks! Goal was to keep her on SS (as she loves it - I built her 1x1 as gravel grinder/all rounder on fat franks and restored old Miyata Elevation 200 as a townie/bad weather bike). So when it came to her Moonie - I knew summer gearing would be way to high for snow so we decided to have some options thus 4 speed SS was born. And because her rear wheel is QR with surly tugnut - I can change ratio right on the trail in couple of minutes.


----------



## Ranger Pride (Jan 21, 2005)

I ended up picking up the Mukluk from a friend that was building a blinged out carbon fatbike. Should be fun. I will probably still build the singlespeed up as well. You can never have too many bikes.


----------



## CrossFix (Jul 22, 2013)

I think the OP should get a SS with wide clearance.
It sounds like you live in a place where wider tires will be beneficial for less than half of the riding you do, whereas your knee issues will prefer skinnier tires and a light bike with a light gear for almost all of your riding. 
So it's a pretty easy decision.
Either go mid-fat SS, like a Krampus or Pugsley, or find a SS frame with clearance for 2.75 knobbies, something with enough extra space for running studs or chains in the gnarliest winter months, and enjoy the weight savings and practicality.
My $0.02.


----------



## dbhammercycle (Nov 15, 2011)

Apparently there is no answer to this question other than..... both. I want it all too. Unfortunately, I'm mostly broke but no one cares and I have no friends with a fat bike just laying against the wall either. ARGH!


----------



## cr45h (Jan 13, 2007)

do the ss, especially if you've already had a fat bike and weren't really sold on it. if you are in the middle, rock a krampus


----------



## CCSS (Apr 6, 2004)

santacruzer said:


> Krampus, 1/2 fatbike, full single speed. 25lbs of steamrolling fury. I've been enjoying mine if you can't tell
> View attachment 846390


I second that emotion.


----------



## KK89 (May 21, 2013)

^I like that krambus!

..and I believe Ranger Pride, you answered your question yourself.

I was too fatbike curious.. but when I tested one.. I thought they were way too heavy.
Also I think gears are a nightmare at the heart of winter. So I built up Surly 1x1 with 26x3.0 tire in front, and 26x2.6 in the back. No gears.. no freewheel.. Fixed!

Well it's not ready to ride yet.. I'm waiting hubs for my wheels.. will see how she rolls when she is ready.


----------



## buddhak (Jan 26, 2006)

KK89 = winner winner chicken dinner. Let's see that half-chub fixie.


----------



## KK89 (May 21, 2013)

^Patience... parts haven't even left the store yet..


----------



## p08757 (Mar 15, 2012)

KK89 said:


> ^I like that krambus!
> 
> ..and I believe Ranger Pride, you answered your question yourself.
> 
> ...


Sounds like the bike I would love to build up. Please post pictues when you are done.


----------



## KK89 (May 21, 2013)

^Check here if you already didn't: http://forums.mtbr.com/singlespeed/post-your-fixed-gear-mtb-591040-22.html#post10816129


----------



## Raul34 (Feb 7, 2012)

CAN...NOT...RESIST...


----------



## vaultbrad (Oct 17, 2007)

^:thumbsup:


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

Got my wheel!!!! Now two moonies in family - missus has SS and I have my FG

























Build details in fatbikes forum in "show your moonlander"


----------



## buddhak (Jan 26, 2006)

SS Fatty hijack!


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

buddhak said:


> SS Fatty hijack!


Cause they rule! And to be detail oriented - SS FG Fatty hijack  SS Fatty hijack happened before Singlespeed or Fatbike - Page 2


----------



## KK89 (May 21, 2013)

^Awesome Fixie Fat-Bike (FFB?). 

Ratio? (Teeth x teeth, I don't know **** about gearinches)

Winter shall do its best to stop this one..


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

KK89 said:


> ^Awesome Fixie Fat-Bike (FFB?).
> 
> Ratio? (Teeth x teeth, I don't know **** about gearinches)
> 
> Winter shall do its best to stop this one..


Can't wait to face the winter - right now it sits at 36x21. Bud&Lou are messing up all my fg mtb experience:
- I have two karate monkeys which setup as 32x16 on ardents 2x4 (works brilliant on the trail and getting to the trail) and 42x17 on 2.35 big apples (works great for all rounder and gravel grind)
- I have old marin which is 36x16 on 26x2.1 big apples which again works great 
- I have 1x1 SS with 34x16 on fat franks 26x2.35 and it flies
- I have On-One Pompetamine, 42x16 on 700x35 cross tires - no problems, flies on road and on the trail
- Amount of traction and sheer size of bud and lou - 36x21 seems a bit high. I am thinking of going 32x21 and 22x21 for winter. I can still pedal through and go places where I would never even think of going on any of my other bikes but sometimes I get stuck and lack torque (and of course muscles ) to get it moving so I have to get off and walk.
- On the very steep climbs - I just run out of power 3/4 in. Traction is still there!
- Missus one was built as SS with two cogs at the back. Hers primary right now is 36x22 which works much better but she wants to go lower so 32 in front for her as well in the plans.

To sum up long story short - if you plan to run Bud&Lou or similar think twice about ratio! I have little spreadsheet I created and all it does is calculates gear inches. Which works great for regular bikes but all numbers and experience with GI's are off with bud and lou


----------



## Ailuropoda (Dec 15, 2010)

7daysaweek said:


> I'd go with the ss. I have a ss and a ss fatbike... Maybe the fatbike would be more fun geared but after a while the fun kinda faded and the bike is just cumbersome to ride. It's cool to have for the occasional ride but if I had to pick one I'd go with the ss.


That's exactly it. I tried fat bikes and feel the same way. I like riding my Pugsley now but it's more of a grocery-getter. It is the only bike I have ever kept outside; mainly because I hardly ever ride it in the mountain-biking role and I want it available for errands.

I even took the clipless pedals off of it.


----------



## howard78 (Apr 29, 2006)

I was in the same situation you are, SS or fatbike... I had just moved so my 6"full sus was too much of a bike to my new surroundings. I sold my beloved enduro rig and bought...: BOTH! 
I'm kinda surprised that so many of you suggest the SS and don't even concider the fatty. That the fatbike is only a snow/sand/mud kinda bike is a misconception. It can and should be ridden all year! 
I was very suprised on my first ride on a fatbike of how well i performed on trails that most people would concider riding full sus'ers. Now I just can't wait for the snow to cover the neighborhood trails.... Basically the fatbike can be ridden all year, all conditions and on pretty much any trail.
The SS is my weapon of choice in spring and summer. I love the simplicity of the bike and the responsiveness. And of course; there is no bike in the world more sexy than a well built steel SS!
My advice; get both. If that is not an option, don't think that a fatbike needs traditional fatbike conditions to be fun. It is a very capable all year, all conditions, all terrain trail bike!

H


----------



## mattgVT (Nov 9, 2010)

My SS Pugsley, without a doubt, is the most fun trail bike I've ridden. The weight thing - bah, who cares? Its not that much heavier. Too much tire? No such thing, in my opinion - you lean these bikes over and keep so much traction its crazy.

There's no wrong answer, so I'd say ride a few of the bikes you're interested in.


----------



## sasquatch rides a SS (Dec 27, 2010)

I may be a bit late to the party here, but after owning many SS bikes, a Krampus (1x10) now and test riding some true fat bikes, I'd probably also suggest a SS Krampus as others have suggested. It's going to truly be the best "medium" between SS and fat, in my opinion anyway.


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

sasquatch rides a SS said:


> I may be a bit late to the party here, but after owning many SS bikes, a Krampus (1x10) now and test riding some true fat bikes, I'd probably also suggest a SS Krampus as others have suggested. It's going to truly be the best "medium" between SS and fat, in my opinion anyway.


I am so drooling over Krampus SS. Fixed moonie satisfies my urge for FG mtb and muddy snowy trails. For everything else - as much as I love my Monkeys one of them will have to go. I think Krampus SS is ideal do it all bike (fat and SS and since rear wheel will be no offset and no dish - easy to flip flop with velosolo or tommy cog for fixed)


----------



## sasquatch rides a SS (Dec 27, 2010)

mongol777 said:


> I am so drooling over Krampus SS. Fixed moonie satisfies my urge for FG mtb and muddy snowy trails. For everything else - as much as I love my Monkeys one of them will have to go. I think Krampus SS is ideal do it all bike (fat and SS and since rear wheel will be no offset and no dish - easy to flip flop with velosolo or tommy cog for fixed)


Funny you mention that, I just ordered the parts I need to build a FG wheel for my Krampus this morning :thumbsup:


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

sasquatch rides a SS said:


> Funny you mention that, I just ordered the parts I need to build a FG wheel for my Krampus this morning :thumbsup:


I watched tons of wheel building vids yesterday, ordered master wheelbuilding dvd by Bill Mouldon - will practice on old set first. Frame is priority - need to sell couple of fixies I don't use and part with one monkey to buy krampus frame. After that - probably rabbit holes on same hub I have on Moonie (surly fixed/disk) - I don't like cassette bodies and I LOVE white industries freewheels.

And I am totally jealous - don't think I'll get krampus till at least spring!


----------



## sasquatch rides a SS (Dec 27, 2010)

mongol777 said:


> I watched tons of wheel building vids yesterday, ordered master wheelbuilding dvd by Bill Mouldon - will practice on old set first. Frame is priority - need to sell couple of fixies I don't use and part with one monkey to buy krampus frame. After that - probably rabbit holes on same hub I have on Moonie (surly fixed/disk) - I don't like cassette bodies and I LOVE white industries freewheels.
> 
> And I am totally jealous - don't think I'll get krampus till at least spring!


I'll make sure to post pics in the FG MTB thread when I get the wheel built up


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

sasquatch rides a SS said:


> I'll make sure to post pics in the FG MTB thread when I get the wheel built up


Please do! I read surly blog yesterday that on some krampus wheels (I guess non stock builds) spokes were rubbing caliper or disk so curious if non-dished wheel will rub. In theory it should not. I hope tomorrow will be sunny - want to finally take pics of all mine fixed mtb and post them too


----------



## jamiedyer (Jun 24, 2008)

I know you said not to suggest it but like others I run a singlespeed Pugsley and love it. It see's duty all year round and works in any conditions, snow, mountains etc.
My 1X1 see's only minimal use this past 18 months.
Mines a 16'' Pugsley running 36 x 18 gearing.

Jamie


----------



## SeaBass_ (Apr 7, 2006)

I was in the same quandary so I have both - Canfield Nimble 9 HT SS and a Salsa Mukluk 1x9 that is down to 29lbs. The SS is my main Spring/Summer ride and the fatty emerges in the Fall/Winter when I'm in SS shape and don't mind pushing the extra lbs.


----------



## Saul Lumikko (Oct 23, 2012)

mongol777 said:


> To sum up long story short - if you plan to run Bud&Lou or similar think twice about ratio! I have little spreadsheet I created and all it does is calculates gear inches. Which works great for regular bikes but all numbers and experience with GI's are off with bud and lou


Quoted for truth.

I bit a bigger piece I could chew with my SS Moonlander and learnt the hard way that you want at least 1 extra tooth in the rear _and_ 1 less in the front compared to your usual 29er - and that's just to make gear inches match in theory. In practice you might want to consider two extra teeth in the rear (same chainring) to make climbs lighter - you'll catch up in downhill sections even without pedaling, the tires just roll over everything while accelerating all the time.


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

Saul Lumikko said:


> Quoted for truth.
> 
> I bit a bigger piece I could chew with my SS Moonlander and learnt the hard way that you want at least 1 extra tooth in the rear _and_ 1 less in the front compared to your usual 29er - and that's just to make gear inches match in theory. In practice you might want to consider two extra teeth in the rear (same chainring) to make climbs lighter - you'll catch up in downhill sections even without pedaling, the tires just roll over everything while accelerating all the time.


So my 33t ring showed up today - just came up from the garage after installing it. I gave it a quick run around the block (pavement and front yards with grass and leaves on them) - definitely big improvement. Also did a quick short climb from standstill - my driveway is somewhat steep - and it was way easier. Snow is now all melted so I would not be able to compare apples to apples sort of speak but still plan to take it out tomorrow on couple of local trails. Always amazes me how 1T in the back or 2-4 in the front can completely change the experience.

I think I will stick with 33x21 for now - Moonie was really build more to explore and snow riding(singletrack or not). For faster and more aggressive rides I am now assembling Krampus - frame was shipped today and hopefully will sort out wheels within next 2-3 weeks (will buy stock front and will attempt to build rear myself). For Krampus I plan to try 32x17 (it will start with wheels from my monkey and ardent's 2.4 and will hopefully get RH with Knards or Dirt Wizards when they come out). I was planning to run Krampus SS but now leaning more towards FG again (took out the only SS I have for quick spin today and it feels very weird although still fun in its own way).


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

25T for missus should show up tomorrow so hers will be ready as 36x25 when she comes back from vacation. Hers is SS so can't wait to try it with lower ratio as well.
She was doing fine most of the time with 36x22 but was suffering on climbs. For a lot of reasons it will take her a while to develop needed muscle strength and techniques so I really hope she likes 36x25


----------



## Saul Lumikko (Oct 23, 2012)

I'm waiting for my 33t chainring to arrive. I'm still pondering between 20 and 21 in the rear. I might go with 21 at least for the winter. The second set for quicker commuting will be 36 x 17 or 36 x 18, so chain length is affected little if any.


----------



## mongol777 (May 26, 2011)

Before I decided to build Krampus I was going to run 36x17 in summer with something like may be black floyds.


----------

