Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 30 Posts

·
LDC is ded,deth by trollz
Joined
·
2,147 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Is this three completely different models in terms of design and geometry not parts.

15 fuel ex 9.8 29
16 fuel ex 9.8 29
17 fuel ex 9.8 29

The 2016 is the "fastest" most "xc" like right? Thank you

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk
 

·
Formerly of Kent
Joined
·
12,524 Posts
Yes. The 2016 was a 120/120mm XC bike.

Very surprised they did away with it. Great bike.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
554 Posts
I believe the frame and design of the 15 and 16 models were very similar, possibly unchanged. The 2017 is different all around.
 

·
LDC is ded,deth by trollz
Joined
·
2,147 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·

·
LDC is ded,deth by trollz
Joined
·
2,147 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Yes. The 2016 was a 120/120mm XC bike.

Very surprised they did away with it. Great bike.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
Seems like a great endurance bike. Too bad i wont be able to get one with a warranty. Guys are still asking a boatload too.

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
Is this three completely different models in terms of design and geometry not parts.

15 fuel ex 9.8 29
16 fuel ex 9.8 29
17 fuel ex 9.8 29

The 2016 is the "fastest" most "xc" like right? Thank you

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk

the 2016 had if I recall correctly a chain stay change due to boost, a small Geo change

2016 was more towards XC race/Trail riding.
2017 is more towards trail/all mountain I feel after testing a few out
 

·
LDC is ded,deth by trollz
Joined
·
2,147 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Im really digging this bike but really want to do a custom build. I want to do a full xc build. Basically the top fuel 9.9 sl build on a fuel ex 8-9.9 frame. Rs1, xc wheels, no dropper, etc. Its going to be a process. Not a bunch for sale.

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk
 

·
Formerly of Kent
Joined
·
12,524 Posts
When they discontinued it, they left a pretty big hole in their lineup. And, across the industry, there are very, very few bikes like it. The 2017 Scott Spark is the closest, in terms of intent, that I can think of, at 120/120 and race-worthy.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,601 Posts
15 had slightly longer chainstays, a bit shorter top tube, and (IIRC) a little steeper head tube angle than the 16. It also wasn't quite as stiff as the 16.

I prefer the 16 overall, but only by a smidge. My all time favorite endurance racer. It won't be "leaving the building" any time soon.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
795 Posts
When they discontinued it, they left a pretty big hole in their lineup. And, across the industry, there are very, very few bikes like it. The 2017 Scott Spark is the closest, in terms of intent, that I can think of, at 120/120 and race-worthy.
Have you checked out the Kona Hei Hei ? 29er, 120 travel, 68HT, 430mm chainstays
 

·
LDC is ded,deth by trollz
Joined
·
2,147 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
'15 was 142mm rear stays
'16 was 148mm rear stays
'17 was 148mm rear stays and knock block

2015 Bike Archive - Trek Bicycle




...and if you need a 17.5" 2016 EX9.8 29 I can see that Trek is showing 1 left in-stock on closeout.
Thank you. I was actually going to make a post asking is there a way to check for leftovers. I need a 19.5 or 21.5. Even an 8 or 9 would work. I saw a guy got a 9 50pct off. All i really truly want is the 16 frame. Going 2x11, rs1, xc wheels, no dropper. The 9.8 comes 2x11. Thats one less thing i need to take off sell and repurchase.

Its hard to figure out how they come up with prices...

16 Fuel ex 9.8 5100 retail. 2x11, dropper, decent alloy wheels, f34 performance

16 top fuel 9.8 4900 retail. 1x11, carbon cockpit, decent alloy wheels, sid with lockout

17 top fuel 9.8 5100 retail. 1x11, carbon crank,wheels,cockpit,fox stepcast performance with lockout

The top fuel has that reactiv shock now too which is the main reason i want the 16 fuel ex 9.8. Seems like the 17 top fuel 9.8 take the stepcast onto my SS and slap an Rs1 set at 120 on the top fuel and you have almost a 16 fuel 9.8. It wont be true 120 rear though but all i keep reading is how the top fuel feels like it has more than 100. I would prefer a frame under warranty. Although most companies will do a crash replacement anyways just trying to have a warranty with all those moving parts of the suspension. A hardtail not so worried about warranty. I think Trek is slightly overpriced for what you get if you compare say a giant anthem and the top fuel 8 the anthem is way better spec for the money. Its not boost, or reactiv though. Buying a new bike is truly information overload!

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk
 

·
Formerly of Kent
Joined
·
12,524 Posts

Have you checked out the Kona Hei Hei ? 29er, 120 travel, 68HT, 430mm chainstays
They don't make a 120mm version in 29" wheels, as far as I can tell.

That said, the Hei Hei looks very similar to the Spark, suspension-wise.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
345 Posts
In your position I would go for the top fuel as it seems to be closer to the bike you're after and has warranty. The internal control freak cable routing and using a PF92 bottom bracket shell also gives you more options for cranks beyond SRAM for carbon.

An option to get it closer to the travel of the Fuel EX would be to use a 120mm fork and swap out the proprietary shock for a slightly longer stroke and pair off with an offset bushing kit to bring back the geometry. Personally I think a 120mm/100mm F/R travel option would be good enough and look to add in some volume spacers into the rear to prevent bottoming out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
Personally, I wouldn't run a RS1 fork.
It's heavy and a Biotch to change the front tire out.
You can get the same performance and lighter with a SID or a Fox SC ( if you stay at 100mm) The RS1 is plush, I give it that. It's just heavy and a pain to change the front tire, I'd hate to get a flat during a race when you are top 5.
 

·
LDC is ded,deth by trollz
Joined
·
2,147 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Personally, I wouldn't run a RS1 fork.
It's heavy and a Biotch to change the front tire out.
You can get the same performance and lighter with a SID or a Fox SC ( if you stay at 100mm) The RS1 is plush, I give it that. It's just heavy and a pain to change the front tire, I'd hate to get a flat during a race when you are top 5.
Im really shooting for 120 thats why i like the 16 fuel ex. I was placing the rs1 in the same group as a pike or fox 34. Not a sid or sc. I up to this point have had rigid ss so its all new to me. I had a fox fit4 i used a few times, the fork off a scale 900 a performance elite 32. It was like 4lbs though and i could make it flex under the headtube. I was thinking the rs1 was light and stiff for a trail fork vs a heavy xc fork. Im asking for opinions though and the tire is definitely something to think about. Its one reason i love a lefty. The proprietary hub is also a thing since i cant use all my various wheels.

Have you ridden a top fuel and a fuel? Is it a whole different bike or does the fuel just fell like it has more travel but same type of handling.

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
425 Posts
I have my top fuel at 120mm in low setting with the mino chip and a 75mm stem. It is great and I really like the additional travel up front. Turns quick as it did before and I have more confidence in the rougher rock gardens. I upgraded the stock sid fork to an rct3 damper and 120mm. Much better than before.

That said I am selling my bike and getting a 2016 Fuel ex 9.9 frame. I feel like the rear of my top fuel is now under gunned only being 100mm of travel. AND I just moved to an area where I have more rocky trails literally out my front door so I want more travel.

If you're interested in my bike PM me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
Im really shooting for 120 thats why i like the 16 fuel ex. I was placing the rs1 in the same group as a pike or fox 34. Not a sid or sc. I up to this point have had rigid ss so its all new to me. I had a fox fit4 i used a few times, the fork off a scale 900 a performance elite 32. It was like 4lbs though and i could make it flex under the headtube. I was thinking the rs1 was light and stiff for a trail fork vs a heavy xc fork. Im asking for opinions though and the tire is definitely something to think about. Its one reason i love a lefty. The proprietary hub is also a thing since i cant use all my various wheels.

Have you ridden a top fuel and a fuel? Is it a whole different bike or does the fuel just fell like it has more travel but same type of handling.

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk

It's a different bike.
Top fuel was 100/100
My fuel was 130/120
a 19.5" Top Fuel feels like a True 18.5" bike. It feels small.
My fuel felt like a 19.5" bike or a Large.
Geo is way different

RS1 is flexy. It has great vertical stiffness. I you push it in a corner hard it will flex and you can really feel it.
A fox 34 only weights 100grams more than the RS1 but you also have to account for the heavier hub,
I have ridden my RS1 over some rough trails. IT didn't like it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,335 Posts
It's a different bike.
Top fuel was 100/100
My fuel was 130/120
a 19.5" Top Fuel feels like a True 18.5" bike. It feels small.
My fuel felt like a 19.5" bike or a Large.
Geo is way different

RS1 is flexy. It has great vertical stiffness. I you push it in a corner hard it will flex and you can really feel it.
A fox 34 only weights 100grams more than the RS1 but you also have to account for the heavier hub,
I have ridden my RS1 over some rough trails. IT didn't like it.
I'm building a XL Trek Fuel EX 9.9 29er for a friend, this is one of the best frames right now. 27.5+ wheels going on it, this is a hot set up!! Bike will be 24lbs!!
 
1 - 20 of 30 Posts
Top