The Fuel EX is a mainstay in Trek's lineup, a 120mm bike that has undergone numerous revisions over the years to ensure that it remains a cutting-edge trail machine. For 2016 the 29” wheeled version gets the Boost treatment, which means that the rear axle spacing is now 12x148mm, and 15x110mm up front. This change allowed Trek to drop the bike's chainstay length from 452mm down to 436mm while still allowing for the use of a front derailleur.
The 9.9 is the highest end complete model in the Fuel EX line, and comes equipped with a lust-worthy parts spec that includes a Shimano XTR drivetrain, Race Face's carbon Next SL cranks, a carbon DT Swiss XMC 1200 wheelset, and Kashima-coated FOX suspension. In short, it'd be hard to spec a nicer kit than this. The 9.9 29 is only the tip of the iceberg though, and there are five other models available, starting with the aluminum Fuel EX 5 for $1989.99 USD.
Fuel EX 9.9 29 Details• Intended use: trail
• Rear wheel travel: 120mm
• Wheel size: 29''
• Frame material: OCLV carbon
• Boost 148/110 spacing
• Shimano XTR drivetrain and brakes
• DT Swiss XMC 1200 carbon wheels
• FOX Factory 34 Float shock and RE:aktiv shock
• Weight: 24.05 lb (size large)
• Sizes: 15.5", 17.5", 18.5", 19.5", 21.5"
• MSRP: $8399.99 USD
•
www.trekbikes.com Frame DetailsThe Fuel EX's full carbon frame has a clean and modern look to it, with a subtle curve to the top tube that provides plenty of standover clearance while also leaving room to mount a water bottle inside the front triangle. The brake, derailleur, and dropper post housing are all tucked neatly out of the way inside the frame thanks to Trek's Control Freak system. Control Freak is one of the better internal routing configurations out there, offering nearly unlimited options for running housing through the modular rubber ports found on either side of the headtube. There are also two slits in the downtube that a zip tie threads through to cinch everything together and eliminate any potential rattling inside the frame.
Boost 148/110Last year's Remedy was the first bike on the market to feature Boost spacing, a rapidly emerging standard that uses a 12x148mm rear thru-axle hub instead of the 12x142mm spacing that preceded it. Boost has spread to the front end as well, where 10 millimeters have been added onto the total hub width, bringing it up to 110mm. In both cases, one of the overarching goals is to increase wheels stiffness, based on the theory that wider hub flanges will improve the spoke's bracing angle, and in turn create a stronger wheel.
Boost spacing may still be a point of contention for riders frustrated by ever-changing standards, but even if you never thought that 29” wheels needed to be any stiffer, there's no denying the fact that it has allowed Trek to dramatically shorten the Fuel EX's chainstays while still maintaining a generous amount of tire clearance. That clearance will be a benefit for riders in muddy locales, as well as for those who want to run wider tires without worrying about frame or fork rub. The option to mount a front derailleur still remains as well, a feature that often ends up being eliminated in the quest for shorter chainstays.
GeometrySuspension DesignThe Fuel EX uses Trek's Active Braking Pivot (ABP) suspension design, which is used on everything from their downhill race rigs to XC speed machines like the Top Fuel. ABP uses a pivot that rotates around the rear axle, with the intention being to prevent braking forces from affecting the rear shock in any way. The shock itself isn't attached to a fixed point on the frame; instead, it's attached to the chainstay and the upper rocker link, allowing it to 'float' for what Trek says is increased sensitivity.
Keen observers will have noticed that the rear shock no longer has the upper top hat shaped portion that housed Trek's proprietary Dual Control Valve (DRCV) technology on previous models. Where did it go? It turns out that FOX's new Extra Volume (EVOL) air sleeve closely mimics the feel of DRCV, which allowed Trek to turn their attention to including their new RE:aktiv shock technology on as many models of the Fuel as possible.
Developed through a collaboration between Penske, FOX, and Trek,
RE:aktiv was designed to improve a bike's pedaling performance without diminishing its ability to absorb impacts. A spring loaded valve inside the shock body allows for increased low speed compression for pedaling support on smoother terrain, but when the shock's shaft speed increases the valve opens up, enabling the shock to quickly and smoothly absorb the impact before the valve closes again. This action happens in all three compression settings, in theory allowing rides to choose how much pedaling support they want without worrying about being jarred by larger impacts.
Specifications
Specifications
|
Price
|
$8399.99 |
|
Travel |
120mm |
|
Rear Shock |
Fox Factory Float EVOL, RE:aktiv |
|
Fork |
Fox Factory 34 Float |
|
Cassette |
Shimano XTR, 11-40, 11 speed |
|
Crankarms |
Race Face Next SL, 32T |
|
Rear Derailleur |
Shimano XTR, Shadow Plus |
|
Shifter Pods |
Shimano XTR, 11 speed |
|
Handlebar |
Bontrager Rhythm Pro 750mm |
|
Stem |
Bontrager XXX, OCLV Carbon, 31.8mm, 7 degree |
|
Grips |
Bontrager Race Lite, lock-on |
|
Brakes |
Shimano XTR Trail hydraulic disc |
|
Wheelset |
DT Swiss XMC1200 Carbon |
|
Tires |
Bontrager XR3 Team Issue, 29x2.30" |
|
Seat |
Bontrager Evoke RXL, carbon rails |
|
Seatpost |
RockShox Reverb Stealth |
|
| |
SetupThe Fuel EX is extremely well specc'd out of the box, which should be a given considering its price tag, but there are a few little tweaks that can transform it into even more of a hell-raiser out on the trails. The first order of business is to swap the 70mm stem for something shorter, preferably 50mm or less. I know, you've heard this before, and everyone has their own preferences, but trust me – it's worth it out on the trail for the added control, especially when gravity takes over.
The next step is optional, but recommended if you spend any time in loose or wet terrain: install a meatier tire up front. The XR3 tires are solid performers across a wide range of conditions, but running a beefier tire like the Bontrager SE5 or something similar helps considerably in more technical terrain. Plus, by keeping the lower profile tread in the rear the bike's rolling speed isn't affected as much.
Setting up the suspension is a straightforward process, and to make things even easier Trek has a suspension settings calculator on their website. Simply select the bike model, input your weight, and with one click the suggested air pressure and rebound settings for the fork and shock will be displayed. The suggested shock pressure, 20 pounds above my body weight, ended up being exactly correct for me, although my final fork settings were a little softer than what the program displayed. In any case, it's a good place to start before adjusting things to match your personal preferences.
ClimbingSwitching from a heavier all-mountain bike to the Fuel EX creates the same instant feeling of buoyancy that a deep sea diver experiences after shedding his weight belt and rocketing to the ocean's surface. 24 pounds is remarkably light for a 120mm full-suspension 29er, a number that's made even more impressive by how stiff and flex-free the frame is. Trek claims that the overall frame stiffness has been increased by 14% over the previous version, and although I don't have any way to precisely verify that number, I'm inclined to believe them based on my experiences out on the trail. Standing up and sprinting, hitting a natural hip jump into a root-filled landing, pushing hard into a bermed turn – in all instances the bike felt extremely solid, and much more composed than I would have expected given its weight.
Unlike their longer and slacker enduro relatives, trail bikes are expected to exhibit better than average climbing manners, and in this regard the Fuel EX 9.9 doesn't disappoint. It'll scamper up just about anything in its way with a surefootedness that helps keep the rear wheel firmly planted on the ground even on loose terrain. Even with a short stem installed it was easy to keep my weight distributed properly, and there was never any front wheel wandering on steep climbs.
There is a modest amount of suspension movement if the shock is left wide open, especially when standing up and mashing on the pedals, but this can be counteracted by flicking the rear shock's blue lever to the central low speed compression setting. I rarely used the stiffest Climb mode, but the beauty of the RE:aktiv damper is that even in the firmest setting the shock will still absorb impacts, which allows for more traction compared to a shock that fully locks out. Plus, if you do forget to switch out of Climb mode before heading downhill there's not going to be the jarring, my-fillings-are-going-to-rattle-out feeling that can occur on a shock with a traditional lockout.
With a 40 tooth cog as the easiest gear out back and a 32 tooth ring up front, the Fuel's gearing is a bit tall for a 29er, but luckily the bike's light weight helps to counteract this minor inconvenience. For riders that do find themselves wanting to spin more than stand on the steepest ascents, Race Face's direct mount chainrings are extremely simple to swap out, and a 30 tooth ring up front would make an appreciable difference.
DescendingOkay, so a 24 pound carbon 29er climbs uphill well – that's not exactly surprising. It's what happens after the climbing ends that really matters, and once again the Fuel EX delivers. While it may not possess the same margin of error that's present with the
Remedy, its longer travel sibling, the Fuel EX still dishes out a smooth and controlled ride, even on rougher terrain. The feel of the Float 34 up front matches that of the rear shock, and there's plenty of support to keep the bike from going through all 120mm of travel too rapidly.
A 68.8° head angle keeps the Fuel's handling on the quicker side of things without being twitchy, and the shorter chainstays (compared to the previous version) make it easier to get the back end around sharp turns. As a whole the bike feels extremely well balanced, placing the rider in a neutral position between the wheels, ready for whatever comes around the next twist in the trail. It does have its limits, but it takes a seriously rowdy trail before it starts to get rattled, and even then it's usually just a matter of easing off the throttle ever-so-slightly to avoid getting ping-ponged off line. Remember, this is a trail bike, and Trek has other bikes in their line for riders that are more focused on the downhill portion of the riding equation. I did find myself wondering what a 130mm fork would feel like, which is how the aluminum Fuel EX 9 comes equipped. That extra 10mm of travel would slacken the head angle a touch, and likely add a bit more stability in the steeps, pushing the Fuel more towards the Remedy's territory.
As far as jumping goes, depending on who's asking I may or may not have ridden a lap on Whistler's A-Line just to see what would happen. You know, for science. It turns out that hitting big jumps on a bike this light is a wildly good time, albeit one that's well out of the realm of the Fuel's intended purpose, and not something I'd suggest making a habit of doing. All the same, the capabilities of this carbon machine are downright amazing.
Component Check• FOX Float 34 Factory fork: On my first couple of rides aboard the Fuel EX I wasn't able to get full travel out of the Float 34 no matter how hard I tried, so I removed two of the yellow volume spacers from the air spring side of the fork, a quick adjustment that made all the difference. Smooth, supportive and precise, the Float 34 is an ideal match for the Fuel EX, and the ability to adjust the low speed compression in the fork's full open mode mode is a welcome improvement.
• XTR Brakes: For the most part, the Fuel 9.9's build kit was flawless, but the XTR brakes gave me trouble. I ended up bleeding both the front and rear brake to try and achieve a more consistent lever feel, but still couldn't get them to pull to the exact same spot each time. One pull would have the lever going through ¾ of its stoke, and the next would have it moving halfway before the pads contacted the rotor.
• Bontrager Evoke RXL seat: Seats are always going to be a matter of personal preference, but I found the Evoke RXL to be extremely comfortable, with a supportive shape and just enough cushioning in all the right places.
• DT Swiss XMC 1200 wheels: The XMC 1200s held up well to everything I tossed at them, and despite the hard use they saw there was never a need to put them on the truing stand. Even if they had needed an adjustment, the nipples easily accessible on the outside of the rim, which isn't always the case with high end carbon wheels. The 24mm internal rim dimension isn't pushing the boundaries as far as width goes, but there was still plenty of support for 2.3” tires without any burping or rolling the bead off the rim.
Pinkbike's Take:
| It's hard to think of a rider who wouldn't have fun on the Fuel EX. This is a bike that could easily toe the line at a local XC race one day and take on a rugged backcountry loop the next without missing a beat. Its trail manners are impeccable, a shining example of how a modern trail bike should behave. - Mike Kazimer |
Visit the high-res gallery for more images from this review
About the ReviewerStats: Age: 33 • Height: 5'11” • Inseam: 33" • Weight: 155lb • Industry affiliations / sponsors: None Twenty years deep into a mountain biking addiction that began as a way to escape the suburban sprawl of Connecticut, Mike Kazimer is most at home deep the woods, carving his way down steep, technical trails. The decade he spent as a bike mechanic helped create a solid technical background to draw from when reviewing products, and his current location in the Pacific Northwest allows for easy access to the wettest, muddiest conditions imaginable.
I always wonder: who are that gu(a)ys with minuses in mind...
While in here, @hllclmbr those cheaper bikes aren't as good as this one. What's wrong with wanting performance and price? If we just roll over and take it won't the prices keep going up? :-P
What are you talking about ? What are you know about my life ? Who are you to tell me what to do at all ?
Don't create useless fiction, please: I just said what I think. Period!
@makripper, sorry. Not telling you how to live your life dude, just saying if you live it like a dick then I won't be inclined to show you any respect. They are only little plus see and minuses but I'd just prefer less negativity, we're all mountain bikers after all. People get down voted just for challenging the norm and voicing opinions that aren't popular. And they are silenced. It's rubbish.
Allright. Got it.
Nothing personal, but even if i got $9000, even if I EVER WILL, I NEVER spend it on a bike at all.
But if I'd ever gone totally crazy to spend that amount of money on the bike there are more than enough A LOT BETTER alternatives.
More importantly though is, if you read the review, Mike does note how poor the brakes are. I don't know when the last time is that you rode your bike, but the last time I rode mine and the brakes weren't working at 100% it was downright dangerous and I could not get my shred together. At that price tag, the bike had better be tight and flawless, not being found lacking in possibly the most important department there is.
SM-BH90 is the newer narrow bore hose for use with the new style brakes. This comes in 4 different versions -
straight to straight for Deore M596
straight to banjo for SLX / XT / XTR
straight to longer banjo for Zee
straight to longer gold colour banjo for Saint
You can use the new SM-BH90 hoses on older brakes but using the old wide bore hoses on new brake models in not advised.
> What's your dream bike out of curiosity? @bikecustomizer
I now really thinking out about the several alternatives: Zerode, Canfield Jedi, Banshee, Devicnci. (I mean frame only)
There are really very close to acceptable propositions in buy/sell.
They also expensive for me, but way far from $9k while much better.
Guys I help you get on a board both now! ))))))
Testing a 120mm travel 29r on overly manicured bike park trails just about says it all, man that grass looks like you'd need boost to get over it!
fotos.mtb-news.de/p/1819141
32t max? No. 36t is possible. Google it.
cdn.velonews.competitor.com/files/2013/04/DSCN1677.jpg
Paper thin chain stays? My Enduro 29 rear end is pretty flex free. Never heard of any stiffness related problems.
Changed my bearings after 2 years (i do that on every bike). The guy form the Bike shop told me after the change, that it wasn't necessary. Pivot problems? No.
Boost? gtfoh...
20 mm thru axles have always been 110. 15mm axles moving closer to being 20 mm axles. Maybe we could have just not bothered with yet another "standard" in the process with 15 from the beginning, instead working to refine an existing, and entirely functional set up?
Nah. Then it's way harder to be the latest and greatest at something.
I did get a chuckle out the last sentence... we "need" something else. Do we? Do we need 15mm thru to be 110 with a bigger hub interface? Maybe, i guess... I understand why this happens, in the end, it's fine. On and on it'll go. I just think the route to get to this point in this specific case has been a bit asinine.
20x110 old hub flanges
15 x 100 old hub flanges
15x110 new hub flanges
20x110 new hub flanges
I'd also be willing to bet that if the industry had been developing this tech earlier, they could have moved the disc mounts in 5mm to make them compatible (although that works against the idea of selling more new things, so naturally it's unlikely it'd happen anyway).
Apparently, you think otherwise, and that's ok. I own both, so I'm "part of the problem" (in a manner of speaking) myself. Such is life.
This is actual data based information Source : me, bending 9mm axles, but never happened with 15mm.
Its a lot of money for some daft specing.
32 tooth is too tall with a freakin' 40 ring in the back? The thing weights 24 lbs... if you can't push that uphill with a 32-40, you might need to hit the gym.
Review hit right on all the points I would have made (and addressed in my own bike) - and it's a killer trail setup.
I don't generally like buying complete bikes, but now that "everything" on my Santa Cruz is obsolete I may make the jump.
I demoed a Top Fuel a few years ago and was amazed how much of a beating it could take, but I think this is more my speed
Does an extra 3mm of width either side really make that much difference?
Probably not.
what helmet are you wearing in these photos?
You would think that bigger companies with more purchasing power (when it comes to spec'ing their bikes) would be able to offer prices comparable to a Transition, or SC, or YT etc...just based on their sales volumes alone. But instead they gouge the heck out of the customer and justify the price by...?
Specialized is probably the worst offender. Trek can at least claim US based manufacturing resulting in higher costs but Specialized...where are you guys coming from with your prices? Specialized S-Works Camber 29...9800 bucks? Thousand dollars more than this Trek and it is made offshore in China where carbon mfg is dirt cheap? How do you justify that? And don't tell me it is the RS1 fork because it is only 200 bucks more than the Factory 34 Float on this Trek...if that.
At the end of the day people will buy what they wanna buy and I am sure this post will generate some neg props because it is centered around pricing but...if someone is paying that much money for a bike while competitors are offering pretty much the same thing at substantially less...you would think one would ask where there money was going?
Luckily, all of these companies offer less expensive models, allowing riders to drool over these highend exotic rides and then purchase the one that actually fits their budget. The lower priced options might end up being a little heavier and not quite as refined, but they're still going to be a good time on the trail.
At the end of the day, there is no point in arguing this really. We've all seen these posts before every time PB reviews a bike with a price up in the stratosphere. There are clearly 2 camps, one that thinks prices are justified and the other that thinks it is out of control.
That being said, personally, I think this high price business model hurts the industry a little bit. It hurts it in that all of the above mentioned bikes I listed are available on line and they are all incredibly competitive against these stratosphere bikes offered by the bigger brands. So if you are a shop, and you deal say exclusively Specialized and Giant, and a customer walks in wanting a high end bike, what are they going to do? Are they going to shell out the extra grand on a bike because it says Specialized or will they order the Santa Cruz off of CBO? And lets face it...when it comes to bike sales...shops make money on these high end sales because the profit margins are high...as they should...but if the MSRP's are set up into the stratosphere on the high end equipment...people are going to buy on line ans shops will suffer.
I see this happening in my area. Shops carry hardly any high end stuff because they can't sell it. Then when you try to buy a part to repair a high end bike, it's never stocked and it needs to be ordered anyway. I couldn't even buy a BB92 for my Kona and I checked 3 different shops. As for these high end bikes...I have never seen one in a shop personally...at least not in my area.
Secondly, I never said anything about Taiwan. In-fact I believe carbon AND aluminum bikes coming out of Taiwan are much better and higher prices are more justified when compared to Chinese made frames. Again, I am basing this on first hand experience with frame prices and quality coming out of China in the 2008-2010 range.
Thirdly, if you read my original post, I did make mention of Trek's prices being at least somewhat justified being that they do have in-house composite manufacturing which is incredibly expensive and as you mentioned very difficult to stay competitive with off shore carbon manufacturing.
So you say SC has bikes coming out of both China and Taiwan? I would be curious to know if the split is Aluminum bikes coming from Taiwan and Carbon from China or does it go even further with the C bikes coming from China and the CC bikes coming from Taiwan. If it is the latter, I think the price delta between the 2 tells the story and perhaps really drives home the fact that big mfgrs are way overpricing their China made carbon frames. On the other hand of both the C and CC bikes are made in China, I think that still begs the question as to why the big mfgrs are so expensive because everybody's frame is made there. If anything, the volume of carbon and number of frames purchased by a company like Specialized compared to SC should entitle them to a bulk discount...which again begs the question...why are the big box guys so $$$. If anything they should be the ones bringing this high end stuff to the people at much more reasonable prices.
And BTW, Although Trek and Specialized still being USA owned is very admirable, it's irrelevant to the point. I mean are you arguing that it is justified to throw more money their way for something as intangible as USA ownership? At least when Cannondale was profiting off of the USA mantra you knew you were getting a USA made bike.
Secondly:these bikes you are bitching about are made in Taiwan, not China.
Finally, disclaimer: I sell bikes fromTrek, Specialized, Salsa and Retrospect. In my 30 year career I have sold bikes from the above plus Giant, Cannondale, GT, Fuji, Univega, Diamondback, Proflex, Fat City, Redline, SE, Bike-E, Vision, Sanataria, Co-Motion, Schwinn and a. Half dozen others I can't remember.
The point is both Trek and Specialized offer awesome customer service. That is why they are worth the price. I have 2 open customer service claims right now that will result in happy customers with Trek or Specialized products.
Thirdly,, if Pon holdings decides to follow the excellent customer service model that Trek and Specialized have, they will give these guys a run for their money.
I am happy to order hard to find parts for my customers. That is why I am in business.
Someday there will exist a ethical, high quality and affordable channel for bikes directly sourced from a Chinese factory. By then, it might be cheaper to buy from Wisconsin.
Maybe the review should be done by a 50-something guy with money to burn.
don't be a hater
Come on Trek let's have an even more expensive bike and while you're at it, change something else so this bike can have obsolete parts in a year or two.
So for all the unnecessary "tweeking" the rear tire clearance looks pretty tight.
If the bike had actually broken on you Trek would have gladly warrantied the part you broke.
But it didn't break, you broke it by riding it past it's intended purpose.
(Walmart sells bikes for people like you)