Trek Farley

Talk about anything.

Moderators: Bearbonesnorm, Taylor, Chew

Post Reply
ton
Posts: 2505
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:53 am

Trek Farley

Post by ton »

threw my leg over a carbon farley today. for a man who finds it hard to be impressed, it raised a lot of interest.

anyone seen/ridden/got one?
User avatar
voodoo_simon
Posts: 4106
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2013 9:05 pm

Re: Trek Farley

Post by voodoo_simon »

The normal Farley sold out by Xmas last year, so I'd make your mind up quick.

Not seen one but the spec sheet is certainly appealing, I'd be tempted with one of I had the money.

Did you not ride a fat bike a couple of weeks ago and not like it? Obviously there are fat bikes and there are fat bikes :grin:
User avatar
JohnClimber
Posts: 3928
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 10:41 pm

Re: Trek Farley

Post by JohnClimber »

ton wrote:threw my leg over a carbon farley today. for a man who finds it hard to be impressed, it raised a lot of interest.

anyone seen/ridden/got one?
Do you want to buy your fat inner tubes back? :lol:
ton
Posts: 2505
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Trek Farley

Post by ton »

the on one i rode felt like a big hefty quishy lump. the plastic bike today felt pretty light and tight.
the 2016 model looks very nice.
User avatar
FLV
Posts: 4256
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 9:12 am
Location: Northern Edge of the Peak - Mostly

Re: Trek Farley

Post by FLV »

ok. I admit it. I don't like fat bikes.

Even the 25lb beargrease I tried (a pal has one)

They steer weird, drag on tarmac sections, tyres cost even more than 29+ (I will never give money to on one / Planet x again so forget it)

I love the look of the blue surly ICT, it makes me smirk. but I cant see how its all that.

I do think that for riding in the frozen wilderness, like alaska, canada, (alps briefly ) they probably work, but then so do skis...
User avatar
GregMay
Posts: 3822
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2015 12:57 pm
Location: Calderdale
Contact:

Re: Trek Farley

Post by GregMay »

FLV wrote:ok. I admit it. I don't like fat bikes.
Why do you say that like it's a bad thing? I think they are hateful things. Only reason I'd buy one would be to race it.
Image
User avatar
voodoo_simon
Posts: 4106
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2013 9:05 pm

Re: Trek Farley

Post by voodoo_simon »

Only reason I got my fat bike was to race it and I've still got it two years later.

Self steer, at least in my bike, comes from too low pressure in the tyres whilst on a hard surface. Easily fixed :-bd
User avatar
johnnystorm
Posts: 3956
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:55 pm
Location: Eastern (Anglia) Front

Re: Trek Farley

Post by johnnystorm »

voodoo_simon wrote:Only reason I got my fat bike was to race it and I've still got it two years later.
That's how I ended up with my second one.....I later found that a Fatty was really good for putting a child seat on as the extra grip is a safety feature, a child on the bars plays havoc with suspension but you need some cush and I live a mile from the beach in agricultural countryside. Soft and squelchy sums up most of my local trails! :lol:
Image
DrMekon
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2015 11:02 am
Location: Otley

Re: Trek Farley

Post by DrMekon »

I really like the carbon 9.x 2016 Farley frame, but 27.5 Fat? There's only one tyre. Maybe Trek are so big it doesn't matter, and I guess you can always put 26 x 5 in instead. I'd just feel like a hostage to Trek's whims, and I'm already caught by buying a Stache, albeit at least there's a bunch of 29+ tyres out now.

Much as I love my LBS, if I was going for a carbon fatbike, the cheapest Canyon Dude would be hard to resist.
Image
ScotRoutes
Posts: 8144
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 9:56 am

Re: Trek Farley

Post by ScotRoutes »

27.5 Fat? There's only one tyre.
lots of 27.5+ tyres available
Post Reply