Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

Changes With Surly

13K views 87 replies 34 participants last post by  Team Honeybadger  
#1 ·
I have noticed that QBP's website only list the Wednesday and ICT under the Surly Fat Bike section. It seems as if they have no plans in restocking the other fat bikes after the close out last month. It also seems that the ECR and Krampus are super low on stock with no ETA for new ones. Are there big changes coming to Surly?
 
#3 ·
When I ordered my Ogre at my LBS last Saturday. They said QBP only had 18 tarnish grays and 20 blacks left, I got one of the blacks. I went in this pass Wednesday and it was sitting behind the counter. I told them to take their time building it. Can't pay it off until this Wednesday anyways.
 
#6 ·
Exactly. Still, I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't some kind of new bike or change to an existing one. I keep hoping for a Surly version of the Fargo or Deadwood but who knows what they're working on.

Sorta off topic, but has anyone seen the new 8 and 24 pack racks? How are they?
 
#8 ·
i talked to a QBP rep at my local bike shop and he said some of the bikes would be frame only from now on,he specifically mentioned the moonlander...that could be a good move for surly,they make great frames but to be honest the parts they bolt to their stock bikes sorta suck...i mean they are solid builds,they certainly get the job done,i cant say ive ever truly broken any stock parts,and if its a surly branded product its utterly bombproof so far (hubs,rims,cranks)...

also it would be super nice if they would wait until they have products in stock before putting it up on the site...im looking at you drop stop chainrings and bash guards...
 
#10 ·
I agree that the completes come with cost saving components but that is one reason why a lot of people are able to afford Surly. If they only did framesets then it would cost a lot more for people to build them, especially fat bikes. I have never left a Surly bike stock so I know how you feel but they also sell every bike as a frameset for you and me. As a bike shop manager I need them to keep selling completes so i can sell more of them.
 
#11 ·
Who knows what Surly will do. They're pretty unpredictable other than they will take chances and put out unique versatile bikes that are relatively affordable and solid.

I do hope they announce the ET tire in other sizes, preferably 700x40 and 29+.

I feel like last year was an off year for Surly at Frost Bike. I got the impression that they were hamstrung by issues outside of their control (shipping issues) and didn't really announce anything. Then at Interbike I figured there wouldn't be anything and they introduced the Wednesday.
 
#12 ·
Per inside rep @ Q all the OPs versions will be gone. Pugs, Moonlander, ICT and Wednesday will be the fat bike lineup. No clue on the Instigator (I personally wish 26+ caught on) or the Krampus. With everyone suddenly digging 29+, at least around here, thanks to the Stache maybe the platform will stick. I sure loved my Krampus. It would be cool to see the Instigator go 27.5+, that bike is just plain fun.
 
#22 ·
I think Surly's fat bike line up is over crowded. It's a much more mature market than it was, and all four of those bikes don't quite make sense, especially to the new customer or someone without the history to understand why each bike is what it is. And the pugs and the moony are out dated...135 rear end fat bikes? Not for most, not in 2016.
 
#23 ·
I agree that they are "not for most" but Surly is not for most. I think there are huge advantages to having a fat bike that have 135 dropouts front and rear. If I were going to choose one bike to bike pack around the world with, it would the pugs.
 
#24 ·
To be fair your socks are pretty tall. I agree though I'd love to have another true option for us taller folks.

Their blog once showed an XXL Krampus, that sounds good to me. Other than that for me it is the ECR or I go nuts with spacers, high rise stems, and riser bars.

I had a Moony for a moment and it was nice but I really want a fatbike that can also be 29+.
 
#27 ·
Yeah I could do that. I haven't been on one to try it out but according to asolie's well crafted spread sheet I believe the Wed would feel small to me. Could be wrong, would love to be wrong in fact.

Had a very brief spin on an XXL ICT and it felt like a much smaller bike than my ECR. Maybe I'm just a bit old school? I definitely not a trend setter.

Curious to see if Surly has anything new cooking. Can't imagine what it would be but an XXL Wed or Krampus would be nice.
 
#28 ·
Yeah I could do that. I haven't been on one to try it out but according to asolie's well crafted spread sheet I believe the Wed would feel small to me. Could be wrong, would love to be wrong in fact.

Had a very brief spin on an XXL ICT and it felt like a much smaller bike than my ECR. Maybe I'm just a bit old school? I definitely not a trend setter.

Curious to see if Surly has anything new cooking. Can't imagine what it would be but an XXL Wed or Krampus would be nice.
i still had the flat bars on the bike then,the risers change the feel quite a bit,the flat bars gave me that "too far over the front axle" feel before...but yes,you are pretty old school....but for sure the ECR in my short ride didnt encourage me to get out of the saddle and steer with my hips like the krampus would,the modern geo and whatnot definitely encourages a more aggressive approach to riding...plus its waaaay easier to do wheelies and bunny hops!
 
#31 ·
I remember reading the announcement about the Wednesday, they made the point that some of the design attributes of other bikes were increasing manufacturing costs, and that it didn't have to be that way, and they improved this with Wednesday.

Seems to me that language opens the door to make the same kind of improvements to Pugsley and Moonlander. No matter how much you like Pugs and Moonlander, don't say they couldn't be improved.
 
#34 ·
I remember reading the announcement about the Wednesday, they made the point that some of the design attributes of other bikes were increasing manufacturing costs, and that it didn't have to be that way, and they improved this with Wednesday.
Didn't they use cheaper non-butted tubing on the Wed?

Last thing I'd want in a Surly is a heavier less lively frame. The one part that won't change as long as I have the bike. :(
 
#32 ·
Of course they could be improved. Although reducing manufacturing costs hardly counts as an improvement, now does it? The hub argument has no merit because of the selection of much nicer and more affordable 135mm hubs.

The Wednesday looks like a great bike. But the Pugsley is it's own beast, and does what it does better than any of the other options, which is to be a super versatile machine with classic xc geo, non-suspension corrected frame that works with any type of drivetrain you like.

I guess I can expect my retrogrouch badge to come in the mail any day now.
 
#40 ·
Maybe thats just to satisfy demand from current owners? In recent years the frame has been supplied with non offset fork in 135mm spacing which gives you the option until very recently only one front hub - which happens to be a Surly. Been pondering a Pug for a while. Think I'm going to pull the trigger on a frameset while I still can and get matching coloured offset fork.
 
#42 ·
There not be as many versions available of the Pugs later this year but I think it'll still go on. Also, I saw this on the Surly Facebook feed today.

"Sometimes things pop up in your feed from the past and you realize they are worth sharing."

Maybe I?m Old Fashioned | Blog | Surly Bikes

I'm sort of bummed I didn't pick up a SS Pugs when they were on sale, or even a frame when they were going for $275 prior to that. I saw that SRAM is doing a budget 1x11 group, perhaps it'll find its way onto the Pugs for a $1000 Pugs complete or something.

I also bet they'll re-spec the ICT, especially if they're doing away with the Ops version.
 
#47 ·
As much as I would like to replace my Pug with the modern Fat bike this days with 170/190 spacing, I just cant let go with my Pugs due to its 135 hub versatility.
135 may sounds old fashioned, outdated and a weakness, but the availability of cheaper part just makes it justify itself.
Yes, the offset wheel may look weaker than the modern one, but I never heard or read of a failure on a offset wheels. so yes, pugs still one of the best classic Surly ever.
The Pug belongs to the famed old Surly's like the 1x1 and Crosscheck. They were just made perfect and ahead of its time before the new and improved bikes came out.
So yes, the Pug is still the best fat to date.[emoji106]

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
#49 ·
The blog post link by Tyler at Surly as mentioned by tfltroll sums up the Pug well;

"The "just right" amount of bike for me" i agree on that :)

Another reason to keep a Pugs option - Alfine hubs :)

Add offset 29+ wheels and two bikes in one,

8 years on my original Pug is still going, and i just bought a new frame and the new offset fork so i`m sorted for another 8 years at least :thumbsup:
 
#52 ·
Thank you Coastkid, I have other good bikes too, but every time the weather is bad or just wanna have fun on the trails, the Pug is the a no brainer choice for me, [emoji2]

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
#53 ·
Guys, its not like asymmetric or pugsley spec wheels don't work, but the extreme the pugs takes it to is a bummer. It's physics bracing angle and and moment. I love me some Pugs, until the Wednesday cane it out it was my favorite fat bike, and I still love the idea of swapping front and rear wheels. It's not that it doesn't work, its jsut that from a mechanical perspective you can do better. Surly knows that, hence their more recent rides.
 
#54 ·
Guys, its not like asymmetric or pugsley spec wheels don't work, but the extreme the pugs takes it to is a bummer. It's physics bracing angle and and moment.
The offset Pugsley wheel had spoke tension that was no worse than a standard MTB wheel and with no problems surfacing with these wheels after years and hundreds if not thousands of wheels in the wild it's hard to see any need to "improve" the wheel design.

The wider fat bike hubs failing is a real problem that you now have instead. That's not better.