If Phat bikes aren't ridiculous enough already

[FluffyChicken]

26x 2.0 tires on rough trails is way worse than a fat bike.

How did we manage for the first 20 years?

We were sensible and use 1.95" tyres, much better than 2.0"

 

[tock13]

In the last year I have had 2 of them. Surly Ice Cream Truck and a Surly Wednesday. I ordered the Wednesday new from a shop, rode it about 700 yards total around the yard thinking I would learn to like it...nope. Sold em both for the price I bought them for so all is well. Could not get used to them at all, looking down at a 5" wide tire is odd. The bottom bracket width made it like riding a horse. They have their place but I don't live in Alaska or Siberia so I moved on from that trend. Still have a brand new in the box Bluto I need to get rid of though.

 

[Tootyred]

1.95".!.....luxury lad. When I were a boy it was 1.75" rear and 1.50" front.....but then we had knees back then, none of yer poncy modern spring nonsense!

 

[madjh]

The lovely green Michelin wildgripper (1.85"? ) ... they really were wild, the grip was annother thing that that tires didn´t know.

 

[Muddyfox69**]

I was recently overtaken on the road by an E phat bike as he kicked in his motor. About 1km down the road, I overtook him again on my converted to singlespeed Cube mountain bike as his motor died. I then smiled all the way home as he disappeared into the distance.

 

[The History Man]

Re:

Is that the northern version? E fat?

 

[mk one]

Bored...

The northern E By-ke...



Full fat...