Starting from scratch

[Will Elliott]

Hi all,

For the first time in my life I'm finally in a position to buy a new bike. COOL! However, the introduction of 29+ has me a little confused about where to start. Any help much appreciated.

ME: 6'2" 190lbs

INTENDED USE: Southcentral Alaska. Packrafting. Riding trails slowly with my dog. Singletrack. Carting climbing gear (30 lbs) back into the mountains on rocky singletrack. Possibly caribou hunting w/ the addition of a trailer. Touring the Park Road, Denali Highway, or Richardson Highway.

BUDGET: around $1500

WHAT I'VE TRIED IN THE PAST:
-FS 26er and 29ers. Hated the complexity.

-geared 29er hardtail. This was OK. Didn't like the triple crank.

-SS rigid 29er. Loved it, raced it, but I have congenital bad knees and had to give up single speeding. Eventually the bike got stolen.

WHAT I THINK I NEED:
-29er, 1×9, rigid, big tires, frame bag

WHERE I'M CONFUSED:

a) Krampus? Everybody seems to say this thing is super heavy. Normally I go for the lightest gear I can find or make my own, so starting with one of the heavier hardtails out there seems counterproductive. Am I wrong?

b) Do I get an El Mariachi and put a rigid fork up front with a Knard? (Purpose being to decrease weight and complexity.)

c) Ditto aluminum hardtail?

d) Buy a SS 29er like the Kona Unit and turn it into a 1×9 (which I'm assuming a shop would do at a discount?)

e) I'm not considering a fat bike because I would rather xc ski on snow; and I'd be riding on smooth dirt roads from time to time.

f) Not considering a Fargo / ECR because I wanted to err on the side of technical rather than touring. Already have a cross bike.

==

So basically this all boils down to the question of whether for what I intend, it's better to go lighter overall or go for big tires at the cost of weight.

[MW]

Looking at your usage, depends how much soft trail riding you'll end up doing, compared to hard surface use. Fat tires shine most on the soft stuff, but are extra weight and wear on tar.

[David Chenault]

Will, I think you're generally on the right track. A rigid 1×9/10 with big tires should be quite versatile.

Surly frames are darn heavy. The Krampus frame and fork is going to be something like 6-8 pounds. You can only get a Surly so light, even with lots of upgrades.

However, you get good stuff for that weight. Surly frames are tough as anything, which is great for wilderness use. Crashes, falls down hills, and general abuse aren't anything to worry about. They're also stiff frames, which is very good for loaded use and pulling a trailer, especially as you aren't a small guy.

Given your budget, you won't be able to get anything which is that tough and good at pulling a load, and significantly lighter. For your use, a steel or alu Salsa/Kona/etc isn't going to be an upgrade.

That said, you'll have to decide on wheel and tire size. Something like a Karate Monkey will limit you to 2.4 in the back with moderate width (~30mm) rims. You can do a lot with that, but the Krampus clearly offers more versatility.

The big wheels will be a bit harder to put on a packraft, and theoretically weaker, especially loaded. There isn't enough data on how the Rabbit Hole rims hold up to that sort of thing to say one way or the other.

The spec on the Krampus complete is pretty good. You'll be limited to a 30 by 36 low gear, which may or may not be low enough when hauling a load. To put a granny ring on, or a smaller single front ring, you'd have to swap cranksets.

An intriguing option for your use is the new Instigator 2.0. Even if you sold the hydros and suspension fork and replaced them with BB7s and a steel fork you'd be over budget.

In short, I think a Surly is a good choice, and the Krampus would probably check all your boxes and be fun as heck (which is important). My Karate Monkey is eight years old, and the Krampus and Instigator are the first bikes which have tempted me to replace it. If I didn't have a full fat bike I probably would have already.

[Nick Smolinske]

I just wanted to add another option, which is a 2×9. Depends on the reason you dislike complexity – do you not want to deal with two derailleurs while riding, or just dislike them in general?

When I put my 29er together (mostly from used components) I was pleasantly surprised to find that the chain angle was such that I can use almost the entire cassette from the granny gears. This gives me enough gear range for all the trail riding I've done yet, and I only have to use one shifter. I'm not sure why exactly the angle lined up this way – I thought at first because I put in a 118mm bottom bracket, but that's not really big enough to make a difference – it maybe moves the chainrings half a gear to the outside.

My 2nd chainring gives me that little extra oomph on the rare trail when I need it, but more importantly it gives me road gears to get to and from the trailhead.

In place of a 3rd chainring I installed a bashguard, made by Nashbar. I like it a lot, especially the price – but I think there are probably lighter ones out there. After just my first couple rides I busted up my 2nd chainring badly enough to be unrepairable, so I think it's worth having one.

EDIT: Just noticed your note about carrying climbing gear. I posted a thread about a pannier system I created in the MYOG forum on bikepacking.net. I would totally recommend the concept for climbing gear, which is something that I've thought of as well. I used them for an overnight bikepack and they were super solid. My current version looks better, and hopefully I'll do an Xpac one soon after I feel like the design is fully refined.

(In the interest of full disclosure, I am in the business of selling panniers – but if you want to make them yourself I'm happy to post up any details or answer any questions.)

[Will Elliott]

Hi all,

I wanted to send out a heartfelt thanks for the well-considered, thorough replies to my question, especially from some extremely experienced people. Much appreciated. Incidentally I just had a chance to ride a Krampus in my size for about 60 seconds on pavement. It's perfect and a big improvement over my current bike packing ride:

I'll post a TR here if I get one out onto the trails soon. Thanks again

[Dave T]

Hi there.

I sent you a PM re: Surly in your area. I have an Ogre, and the ECR looks awesome (as does the Krampus and the venerable KM). Surly's are heavy, but they are also tried and true tough bikes. Did 350 miles on the Ogre in Death Valley last fall, and it chewed up the washboard and pavement and everything in between, with 15l of water on the back.

[casey redder]

short chainstays mean that rear paniers are out of the question unless you gotst teeeny tiny feet… this thing was designed to be a high volume tire "race bike"… it's fun as hell, by the way. fast, frisky and the high volume tire roll over everything… for adventure biking in AK, tundra, streambeds, rocks… i'd say either a moonlander (got one, its sweet as well) or an ops pug… both are designed to carry loads and the steel frames, although heavy, are joys to ride for long hauls. Just my two cents, but i do have experience on a Krampus and wouldn't recommend it for use with a rear rack and pulling something might be kinda wierd too, it likes to wheelie.

[Author]

Posts