Trek Stache 9 - Review

Apr 16, 2015
by Mike Kazimer  
trek stache 9

It looks like Trek's Stache hardtail spent the winter in the gym, or maybe on the couch pounding back Twinkies and Funions, because for 2016 the bike has grown to plus-size proportions – literally. The latest iteration of the Stache is sporting 29 x 3.0” tires mounted to 50mm wide rims, characteristics that place it squarely in the 29+ category. Wait a sec, 29+? Where did that come from? There are various origin stories for where this segment of the mountain bike market started, but a good chunk of the credit goes to Surly, that irreverent band of bike addicted misfits based in Minneapolis, Minnesota. In 2012 Surly released the Krampus, a steel framed, rigid hardtail 29er that could accept extra-wide tires, and it wasn't long before a number of other smaller manufacturers followed suit.

Trek's decision to join the party partially evolved from what was called 'Project Weird', an in-house research project based around frame geometry and trying to figure out just how short of a chainstay length was possible. These experiments led to developments that would eventually make their way onto the Stache, including the sliding Stranglehold dropouts that allow the bike to have 420mm chainstays, which is short even for bikes with 'normal' sized tires, and extremely impressive when considering the wheel dimensions of the Stache. The goal with the new bike was to have something that was enjoyable to ride everywhere (Trek is adamant that 'this isn't a fat bike'), although with an admittedly different on-trail feel than what most riders are used to.

The Stache 9 is at the top of the three bike lineup (there's a Stache 7 and a 5, as well as a frame only option), and retails for $3879.99 USD. Component highlights include a SRAM X1 1x drivetrain, Shimano XT brakes, Manitou's new Magnum fork, and a KS Lev Integra dropper post.

Trek Stache 9 Details

• Intended use: trail / all-mountain / fun
• Wheel size: 29+
• Frame: Alpha Platinum aluminum
• Fork: Manitou Magnum 34 Pro w/ 110mm travel
• Drivetrain: SRAM X1
• Brakes: Shimano XT
• Wheels: SUNringlé Mulefüt 50
• Hube: DT Swiss 350 - BOOST 148 and 110
• Seat post: KS Lev Integra
• Weight: 28.5lb (size 19.5" w/o pedals)
• MSRP: $3879.99 USD, @trek

Frame Design and Construction

The most noticeable feature of the Stache's aluminum frame is the elevated driveside chainstay, a design element that experienced a brief era of popularity in the 1990s before being superseded by the now-ubiquitous double diamond configuration. The elevated stay on the Stache combined with the heavily manipulated seat tube are what allow for such a short rear end, due to the fact that potential issues with chainring and/or tire clearance are eliminated. To help maintain the frame's stiffness, the PressFit 92 bottom bracket shell and a section of the non-driveside chainstay are forged from one single piece of aluminum. To provide even more tire clearance, the rear portion of the bottom bracket shell is squared off, creating a few extra millimeters of space.

The Stache is intended to be run with 29+ wheels, but Trek also realized that certain riders, especially the type who this bike will appeal to, may have other ideas. To that end, the bike's sliding dropouts open up a number of configuration options, allowing it to fit a regular 29” or even 27.5+ wheel, and the chainstays can be run as short as 405mm depending on the tire and rim dimensions. As it is, the Stache 9 has a 68.4° head angle with the 110mm Manitou Magnum up front, but riders who choose to go the frame only route and use a wheel size different than 29+ can maintain the same geometry by running a longer travel fork.
Trek 2016
bigquotesThree inch wide tires mounted onto rims with an internal width of 44mm gives the Stache a super-sized footprint.
Project Weird was part of what brought the new Stache to life, but Boost 148 and 110 were the other pieces of the puzzle. For those that missed it when the new standard was announced, Boost was developed in conjunction with SRAM, and increases the spacing of the front and rear hub, a change that allows for greater tire clearance as well as an increase in the distance between hub flanges. The wider hub flange spacing is claimed to allow for the creation of stiffer wheels due to the improved bracing angle, and the extra space in general allows for big tires to fit with room to spare.

Trek 2016
The seat tube and bottom bracket shell shape were all designed to provide as much tire clearance as possible.
Trek 2016
The Stranglehold sliding dropouts allow the chainstay length to be adjusted between 405 and 420mm.

bigquotesWhen it comes to technical climbing, the extra rollover ability that 29ers possess is one of their most often touted strengths, and the Stache 9's supersized dimensions take this trait to the next level.

Climbing / Handling

From a distance, the casual observer might not immediately notice the Stache's gargantuan wheels – the frame looks proportional, and it's only when you get closer or compare it to a standard 27.5" or 29" wheeled bike does it becomes clear just how much bigger 29+ is than anything else out there. The wheels may be massive, but the actual fit didn't feel that out of the ordinary – a 13” bottom bracket height and 798mm standover are only a few millimeters different than the 'regular' 29” Stache's measurements. Once the stock 80mm Bontrager stem was swapped out for something nearly half the length and the tires were aired up to 13psi it was time to hit the trails.

From the start, it was apparent that it takes a little extra 'oomph' to get the Stache up to speed, but once it gains momentum it'll cruise right along, with nowhere near the amount of rolling resistance I'd anticipated despite the massive footprint of each tire. The overall sensation when climbing is closer to what you'd expect from a full suspension trail bike – the crisp, snappy acceleration that hardtails are known for is replaced by a more muted feeling. When it comes to technical climbing, the extra rollover ability that 29ers possess is one of their most often touted strengths, and the Stache 9's supersized dimensions take this trait to the next level. Roots and rocks simply disappear under the wheels, squashed beneath the 3” Chupacabra tires like a steamroller on hot asphalt. At slower speeds it does takes more input to keep the front wheel from wandering slightly from side to side on steep climbs, but on the whole the bike is still very manageable, even on tighter switchbacks. There's an inordinate amount of traction on tap as well, especially considering how minimal the tread pattern is. It is still possible to spin out, but the only time that happened was on the steepest of climbs when there was looser soil over hardpack ground.

The extra tire width greatly increases the bike's stability, creating a feeling similar to the difference between being on set of cross-country skis compared to a set of fat powder boards. In other words, it's drastic. Whether or not this extra stability is actually necessary is certainly open to debate - I can't say I ever feel especially unstable on 2.3” tires, or even on the skinny tires of a road bike for that matter - but I can imagine that, for many riders, and especially beginners, the extra support could certainly provide a boost in confidence when venturing into more challenging terrain.

Trek 2016


Okay, so the Stache can get up a hill, but what about going down? Yep, it can do that too, remarkably well in fact, although it feels quite different compared to a typical hardtail, and cornering takes a little getting used to due to the extra tire width that there is to work with. You can still lean the bike over and push hard in a turn, but the feeling of side knobs digging into the earth isn't as pronounced. It's harder to get the wheels to break free as well, due to the extra amount traction, but pulling off a two wheel drift around a turn was one of the more satisfying experiences I had on the Stache, especially when they hooked up again and I was able to make a clean exit. When it comes to breaking free of gravity's pull, more effort is required to get the Stache off the ground due to the larger wheels – after all, this isn't a 26” dirt jumper, but the short chainstays help the rear end pop off the lip of jumps without much trouble, and once airborne aboard the big wheeler it's hard to keep from smiling.

One of the caveat's that we typically mention in any review of a hardtail is the fact that the speeds that are possible in technical terrain aren't going to match that of a full suspension bike, and that fact still holds true with the Stache, but the difference isn't quite as stark. The bump absorption provided by the voluminous tires takes the edge off of small bumps, and is more forgiving of line choice errors than a skinnier tired bike would be, traits that make it easy to forget that there is no rear suspension and that the fork only has 110mm of travel. In addition to being helpful on chunky, rocky terrain, that extra cushion provided by the big tires is a boon on drops and jumps as well, taking the edge off what would have otherwise been pretty jarring landings on a hardtail.

Trek 2016
Bontrager's Chupacabra tires measure a true three inches wide, and offered predictable traction despite a low profile tread pattern.
Trek 2016
Manitou's new Magnum fork offers the similar high performance we experienced from the Mattoc in a package that fits big wheels.

Component Check

• Manitou Magnum 34 Pro fork: With its 34mm stanchions and air spring technology borrowed from Manitou's Dorado DH fork, the Magnum is very similar to the longer travel, 27.5” Mattoc we reviewed last year. For such a short travel fork, the stroke was very controlled, and the ability to easily adjust high- and low-speed compression or the hydraulic bottom-out resistance on the top right side of the fork came in handy. There's also a new feature called Incremental Volume Adjust that allows the volume of the air chamber to be altered by moving the 10mm spacers above or below the air piston itself, a process that only requires releasing the fork's air pressure and opening up the top cap. The one downside I found with the fork is that the HexLock QR15 thru axle is still just as fiddly as ever – the concept is simple in theory, but the execution turns reinstalling the front wheel into a more difficult experience than it needs to be.

• Bontrager Chupacabra Tires: Probably the easiest way to knock a good chunk of rolling weight off of the Stache would be to ditch the tubes. Each tube weighs 420 grams, and even with the extra helping of sealant that would be required to seal the tires there would still be a significant weight savings. The tires themselves worked well in a variety of conditions, although I wasn't able to try them in any significant mud, the one area where I imagine the lower profile tread pattern would have limited traction despite the tires' width. I ran them at 13 psi without any excessive casing roll, and it's definitely possible to run lower pressure than that. Bontrager doesn't currently have anything meatier on the market, and on the whole there aren't a ton of 29+ tire options, but that certainly could change depending on market demand.

• Shimano XT brakes: Running 180mm rotors on a hardail may seem like overkill, but believe me, they're a necessity on the Stache. The big wheels develop serious momentum, which requires a high level of stopping power to keep things in control. The XT brakes and large rotors were an appropriate match, and they worked flawlessly throughout the test period.

Trek 2016
  When it comes down to it, it's all about fun, and on that front the Stache delivers. Rider: Mark Allison

Pinkbike's Take:
bigquotesIs 29+ the greatest thing since sliced bread? Should you ditch that sweet all-mountain rig in favor of one of these babies? Well, I wouldn't go that far - even though the Stache 9 is most definitely capable of providing a good time out on the trails, at its core it's still a hardtail, and for really getting after it on rough terrain a proper full-suspension bike is going to reign supreme. However, for riders in the market for a new trail hardtail that want something a little out of the ordinary, the Stache 9 certainly fits the bill. 29+ does mute some of the sensations that I've come to appreciate with 'regular' sized tires - the handling simply isn't as precise in technical terrain, where it's like using a big wooden mallet compared to a small finishing hammer to drive a nail into a piece of trim. Both tools will get the job done, it just depends which one you prefer. It's best to think of the Stache, and the whole 29+ size in general, as another option in the huge array of bike flavors currently available, something a rider might consider as a second, third, or fourth bike to their fleet rather than as their one and only bike. - Mike Kazimer

About the Reviewer
Stats: Age: 32 • Height: 5'11” • Inseam: 33" • Weight: 150lb • 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 way out in 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.

Author Info:
mikekazimer avatar

Member since Feb 1, 2009
1,728 articles

  • 117 7
 "a rider might consider as a second, third, or fourth bike to their fleet"

I'm not crying about bike price, but considering your fourth bike could be so expensive is not normal.
  • 13 1
 lol, you nailed it.
  • 16 109
flag rrsport (Apr 16, 2015 at 13:12) (Below Threshold)
 I have been fortunate enough to get 3 bikes over the $10,000 mark, so for me a 4th bike at that price is reasonable
  • 15 1
 @rrsport still, you aint normal buddy! haha..jk Smile good for you
  • 10 2
 $3879.99 its a hardtail.
  • 5 2
 thenos09 $3879.99 because it got boost 148 and 110.
  • 2 0
 @giangnguy3n its a hardtail
  • 2 1
 Don't want to get blasted here but what exactly is this 29+ sizing? Does a regular 29" tire not fit?
On another note, I wouldn't mind at least test riding one of these!
  • 5 1
 As I understand it, 29+ is something approaching a fatbike 29er - a 3.0 tire on a wide 29er rim. Since 29+ tires are taller and wider than standard 29" tires on the same rim, a bike that fits 29+ will fit regular 29er tire. Conversely, most normal 29ers will not fit 29+ tires - however, some of them DO fit 27.5+, which is a 3.0 tire on a 27.5 rim (and which comes out to roughly the same diameter as a standard 29" tire).
  • 3 2
 Question is, did he nail it with a big wooden mallet or a small finishing hammer?
  • 2 1
 Thanks Bluefire!
  • 110 16
 Exactly 0% of riders who buy this bike will be getting loose like dude in the last pic!
  • 22 0
 I've got a krampus and ride the shit out it haha
  • 2 0
 I wish i could trade my guardrail for this so i could at least try haha. This it's the definition of all mountain hard tail
  • 10 26
flag AllMountin (Apr 17, 2015 at 0:05) (Below Threshold)
 29+ aka clown+. As if 29" wheels weren't tall enough already.

Head angle is too steep for me to consider it AM. Short stays are nice, but in the end, 29+ is for XC usage, and for those who value rollover at the expense of handling. I believe in plus sized tires for hardtails. The extra cush can really take the edge off of rowdier terrain. But I do NOT believe in 29+. 26 and 27.5 plus make more sense. 29+ is a flawed concept.
  • 6 13
flag MignonZhu (Apr 17, 2015 at 8:17) (Below Threshold)
 I agree with you,29+ is a bit pointless haha
  • 9 0
 Just did a test ride on one of these during Trek Demo Day, back to back with a Farley, Slash, and Remedy. The Stache was, by FAR, the most fun out of them all. Judging by the grins of the other testers coming in on theirs, I wasn't the only one that thought so. Front end is easy to lift (manuals and wheelies galore), cornering traction is unparalleled especially when leaning the bike as far over as you can, and yes... getting it airborne is super rewarding. AND IT CAN RUN A GATES CARBON DRIVE! Bike is sick on all levels.
  • 2 0
 I recently purchased the Stache 7, and while I won't be "airing it out" like the rider in the pic, the bike is feels extremely neutral in the air compared to any other bike I've owned. Having come from riding d/s bikes for years, most recently a 29'er Trek Hifi, the Stache is a hoot and the "+" tires are incredible and have me looking for "fun" lines to do! It's getting the SS treatment next.
  • 2 0
 Mine is on the way for an extra bike and it will have the wheels off the ground as much as possible! #lovesbackwheel
  • 55 11
 who's buying these bikes? i think it's cool and all, but i cant imagine seeing them all over the trails.
  • 24 24
 I totally want one, looks radical - like a big dirt jumper. I won't pay more for a bike than I did my car, but I will probably fab something similar out of steel... hah
  • 13 20
flag raybao (Apr 16, 2015 at 11:39) (Below Threshold)
 Probably people who live where it snows.
  • 26 1
 I ran 3"s on my Big Hit for a few years....

Never once had a flat.
  • 9 0
 I see surlys fairly often, and now that they're not the only ones doing this I think the semi-fat tire thing is going to be big.

I think it's pretty cool what they've done with the geometry (flattened/curved seat tube) and the sliding stays, pretty innovative. If they had a version in the sub $2k range I'd be all over it. Not totally sold on the 29+ thing, but the adjustability of it would be really cool to play with.
  • 16 11
 if you don't want one of these its because your stubborn and are just part of the fat bike bashing culture. fat tire has its places. this bike looks friggen insanely fun.
  • 6 1
 A fair number of people, but you won't see many of them on the trails you ride. You get the same type of responses from the bike packing crowd when they see a DH bike--who's buying those and I can't imagine seeing one where we ride.
  • 26 9
 More people than are buying DH bikes.
  • 1 0
 Ive got to say this does look fun, but it raises a few questions for me. What that is that rotational weight like climbing? For a Hard tail what would this be like racing? What it its intended use? and of course why is an aluminum hardtail so expensive? Nevertheless id love to give one a rip.
  • 4 3
 When i go to ride XC sometimes it is always middle aged guys from the city (DC metro area). I have not once seen somebody under the age of 40 riding one in my area. Not knocking anybody, it's just what i have noticed. I would ride one, but wouldn't buy one.
  • 2 1
 I've n very seen on... But bet I'd enjoy riding one.
  • 4 1
- Probably really grippy but not that quick to accelerate (just work on being stronger and smoother)
- I'd probably throw some normal tires on for racing, but I doubt the bike would hold you back at all. It'd be more fun than a racier bike for sure.
- Doin dope shit on trails. Just looks like a really fun bike.
- Yeah it's Al but it has a lot of features and complicated forming. I can see why this frame would be significantly more expensive than your run of the mill alloy hardtail. The flattened seat tube, asymmetric stays, seatstay/TT gusset, adjustable CS length... none of that comes for free. I think it's damn sexy.
  • 2 2
 Or it's because you "currently" don't live in a place where fat bikes can really use their full benefits aka a snowy place. It can also be because as of right now fat bikes aren't really up to snuff of a regular MTB and probably will never really "replace" the regular MTB.
  • 4 4
 @AlexArmanetti If you think fatbikes aren't up to snuff with other MTBs, you haven't ridden a Bucksaw.
  • 4 2
 I'm sure they're "good". I just don't think fat bikes (or semi-fat) can/will replace an MTB. I feel like these fat wheels are a way of making up for poor/no suspension but can't really replace a good full suspension bike or a good hardtail...
  • 6 5
 The tires on this bike are about 1kg each... Full Fat bike tires typically start at about 1.3kg (for foldable tubeless ready offerings). Many full on DH 26er tires today are easily more weight than that. They tend to self-steer because of the momentum (or rather they resist your attempts to steer) but that really is a matter of practice... you have to have confidence to LEAN the corners more (like on motorcycles) and just trust the tires will keep gripping.
  • 1 2
 That's another thing (by the way I propped your comment). I don't like that "trail flattening" characteristic that fat bikes advertise. Now, I haven't ridden a fat bike however that will change soon. I just don't think that eliminating trail feedback is really a good thing unless you have back issues or something like that.
For someone who enjoys going fast (like myself) I feel that a normal tire of maximum 2.5" is preferable because on average they're lighter and provide solid trail feedback without being too harsh. Trail feedback relates more to being able to really pick out lines and have fun on the bike while "good" suspension keeps your riding in check...
  • 14 21
flag the303kid (Apr 16, 2015 at 14:19) (Below Threshold)
  • 2 0
 @303kid: I'm sad you too live in CO.
  • 4 2
 @COnovicerider I owned a 303, fortunately don't live in Colorado and have to deal with everyone and there sister riding a mountain bike. I enjoy the low key shady woods of the east coast where there a more rocks than Joeys on the trail.
  • 3 1
 @303kid seriously. I went back home to Boulder area and that riding blew. So crowded. Made me so thankful for our sick east coast techy trails with all the rocks.
  • 6 2
 @303kid: what is it really like to be a dick?
  • 1 0
 I dunno. After all that, I'm not really convinced. I feel like we're picking at straws for a really good reason to buy one. I do think they're pretty cool looking though. Good lines, nice graphics. Different strokes for different folks.
  • 2 1
 These new bikes will be to current bikes we ride as quads are to motos. Not content that we spend all our money on bikes, the industry wants to market these to people who see bikes as Toys. Nothing inherently wrong with that but I like to think of my bike as a Tool
  • 4 8
flag deeeight (Apr 17, 2015 at 5:29) (Below Threshold)
 I live in a rich neighbourhood with a couple former NHLers, some high-tech CEOs, a former governor-general for the bank of canada, and an actress, where half the homes push over a million each (being waterfront properties)... except for two other serious mountain bikers and a couple of serious roadies, the bicycles around here are a load of department store crap and we have a singletrack trail network that starts right behind the houses. But many own sailboats, powerboats, seadoos, super cars, and so forth. Bikes like these Plus tire offerings and Fats appeal to those sorts of consumers.
  • 2 3
 @deeeight thats all I'm getting at here, sure I like to be a dick and troll but the serious matter at hand is the bike industry is looking to broaden the mountain bike demographic to a older, more affluent crowd and in the process is pricing out the core consumers. Sure we aren't going anywhere, it isn't like this is the first ever evolution in the bicycle before, but all this new plus size stuff is to sell an entirely different style of bikes to an entirely different consumer that did not mountain bike previously. The sport and the industry as a whole need to grow, but that growth shouldn't go unchecked, otherwise the industry is going to alienate a whole lot of people who have been in this sport for a longtime.
  • 2 6
flag deeeight (Apr 17, 2015 at 7:08) (Below Threshold)
 Yes they are but the point you're not grasping is that YOU do not represent the core consumer or for that matter, real mountain bikers. I've been in the sport 27 years now, as have many of my friends and these are the sorts of bikes that we who are spending real actual money, WANT.
  • 2 0
 I'm a college student, I hardly have money for food let alone to buy a new bike every year, I've been riding for 17 years and there are plenty of young riders out there just like me. Sure we aren't spending money right now, but we sure as hell scramble to put together what little we have for upgrades, race entries and what not. I'm in college so hopefully I can get a decent job and afford to buy these new bikes the industry is pumping out every 6 months. The 35-55 newer to the sport demographic might be the ones spending the money right now, buts whats going to happen to the industry when you guys age out of the sport (and you will sorry your not Peter Pan) and my age group has left the sport for other less expensive hobbies. The ski industry had a really similar problem and got smart about it by making it as affordable as possible to get the 18-29 demographic out skiing because they recognized the future value of my demographic, and what they stand to loose if they alienate us.
  • 2 3
 The bicycle industry has been around a LOT longer than the ski industry...and will be around long afterwards...
  • 1 0
 "Mountain Biking" did not become a legitimate part of the bike industry until the early 1980's, skiings history traces back to the early 1940's. The mountain bike side of this industry is still in its infancy and has a hell of a lot to learn.
  • 5 0
 @303kid except the big difference between the ski industry and the bike industry is that there are already tons of affordable bikes that are 100% in line with what entry-level consumers want. Literally every single company has totally rideable and trailworthy hardtails in the sub-$1k range, and many have really solid FS bikes in the $2k range. The entry/affordable level is pretty well covered; gnarly AM bikes and 7lb pairs of touring skis are specialty/performance items and they'll always be priced that way. (Besides, if that Yeti in your profile is your bike, then nobody is really pricing you out of anything and you have nothing to complain about)

Like it or not, I know tons of bona fide bike nuts who truly live for cycling year round (even in the snow and cold of upstate NY), and tons of them are buying fatbikes and mid-fat bikes. These are guys who race DH, guys who race cyclocross, bike commute, whatever. Hell, the + sizes were invented by Surly, and there aren't many companies more hardcore than they are. Bikes like this one may not be that popular on PB, but PB's membership is far from being the "core consumer" in mtb. Out of all the people who spend money on mtbs barely a fraction watch the races, ride chairlifts, learn tricks, or talk about geometry and suspension tuning.

TL;DR: They're not "pricing you out". You just don't have money right now. And when you do, they'll start listening to you. But by then it's likely you'll be older and less gnarly and more open to things like fatbikes. And then some college kid will bitch about you and your taste in bikes.
  • 1 0
 @the303kid "Skiing history traces back to the early 1940s." yea, no. Skiing predates the bronze age: & even recreational skiing starts in the 1800s.
  • 1 4
 And "mountain biking" goes back to the 1880s in point of fact... all bicycling was done "off-road"...for #1...there no paved roads for bicycles to ride on and #2 they made easy substitution for horses.

Also I think 303 is mixing up his skis.... Alpine skiing (aka Downhill) is a purely 20th invention. Cross country skiing on the other hand...
  • 1 0
 I'm really talking more about when the modern faces of the industries we know today began, first ski trade shows were in the 1920's right when rope toes started to blow up, chairlifts came in around the 1930's and without downhill, skiing as a larger sport and industry would have never really taken off. I know about the early Calvary in the US that patrolled the Yellowstone and other areas by bike, but once again had it not been for the evolution of companies like Schwinn 1940's and 50's pushing large scale production of bicycles we would still be buying from small frame builders. None of this is important, I love to ride my bike despite wheel size, tire width, or the internet. Its been far too cold and long of a winter in the north east and my fuse for dealing with the internet is burnt up and gone. I'm glad I get to share the trails with all of you and ultimately our sport will only get better with more participants, I just need to ride my damn bike and get off this computer. Fuck mud season in Vermont.
  • 1 0

You're probably right about the bike industry surviving longer than the ski industry. Unless the 'coming ice-age' believers are actually correct lol. Then it'll be skies and fatbikes all round!
  • 36 7
 Honestly, I dont care either way about the new hub standards and the big tires. This looks like it'd be such a fun bike to just BS around on.
  • 36 9
 you aint just gonna bs around on a 4000$ bicycle... jeez
  • 23 0
 That's right, because bicycles are SUPER SERIOUS...
  • 3 0
 ^props... lol
  • 2 0
 Why do.i feel like like Trek staff were all ordered to work overtime on the PB comments page tonight?
  • 30 7
 I'm ok with a plus sized girl...but not a plus sized bike
  • 6 3
 I find this comment page very interesting. Typically, there are ton of fat bike haters on regular fat bike write ups. Here, not so bad... and this is a 29er, so even more surprising we don't have as many 29er haters too... so to your point. ecrider, I think this is like that good looking bigger boned girl with a pretty face that guys would totally bang because she's cool, funny, likes to drink beers, and would look great if she lost just a few pounds... (i.e., a heavy hottie) vs. just your regular old fat ugly chick.
  • 13 2
 Soooo...Trek went to SRAM and said "Hey, we need a wider hub standard, you in?" SRAM was all like "You bet, we'll need, let's see, new hubs, obviously, and a wider you go." Then Trek was like "Oh...sorry, we went with DT Swiss and Manitou, but thanks for all the engineering." Big ouch.
  • 11 0
 what is that weird presta valve coming off of the back of the dropouts???
  • 4 0
 I don't think its actually a presta valve, but a screw to fine-tune the length of the dropouts. Common on any bike with adjustable dropouts. Take a look at this image here, same thing:
  • 6 0
 Much like Norco have incorporated a spare dérailleur hanger into their frames, Trek have included spare valve cap storage...
  • 1 0
 that faked me out too. 1 guess: is it a set screw to keep the axle from sliding in the dropout and they put a valve stem cap on it?
  • 7 0
 Pretty sure I'll never own this, but who knows. What I do like is the experimentation with the chainstays to get that rear axel closer to the BB. I spent a lot of time researching 29ers with shorter stays and found very few of the big guys put any effort into getting the stays shorter than 17" with 2.4s. This is refreshing.
  • 23 14
 I meh'd so hard on this review I pulled a muscle. But to each his own I guess.
  • 8 9
 I agree...lame
  • 3 1
 Dude, I accidentally down voted you. But yes! Meh indeed!
  • 12 6
 "Roots and rocks disappear" perfect that's exactly what I want! What's the purpose of mountain biking then? I could just save my money and ride my 26" on the access trail and grind gravel. 29lb hardtail 29er XC bike, sounds like a blast! Wtf they going to get noobs to buy next?
  • 4 1
 Spoken like a true 26er. I smoke guys on descents on xc races on my 26er, but get smoked everywhere else (yes I'm out of shape). Descents are a relatively small part of xc races. 29" wheels are like using a larger lever to move a stone. They are capable of more work but require more input, but once you get them rolling they do more work for you. I pass squids all the time that end up finishing in front of me in xc races. Given the current races available near me, if I could afford a good 29" xc bike I would jump on it and adapt my riding style. Maybe I should just focus on training instead - cheaper. Still ... there is a disconnect between what is available
(bikes and races) and what we do with our bikes and our money. Until mountain biking gets big enough to support something more we're always going to be bitchin;.
  • 2 3
 My favorite part of every trail ride is screamin out "rider" as I'm BOMBing a tech rocky descent to the big wheels that passed me on the way up. I could care less if I explode up the climb. Don't get me wrong though I've had a 29er stumpjumper evo hardtail & I knew its purpose was XC. But the bike wasn't a ripper and for me that's no fun, so I sold it for the last year 2013 26" Norco Sight LE slapped some flow ex rims on it and that's the most fun I personally have on a trail & that's what it's about.
I just don't see this bike going fast up or down,,come on think about, it a hardtail XC bike that weighs almost 30lbs. That's more weight than my Norco Sight wth dropper, CB Mallets, and Minions DHF/ardent setup,,and I paid less, cuz 26" anytime anywhere race bike. #Traintoaddlifetoyourdays
..I don't want to hear anything about gyros, makes me hungry.
  • 8 0
 What about the other way around? Now you can ride even bigger rocks and roots, just to keep the technical challenge level high.
  • 1 0
 Yep, rocks and roots will re-appear when you just go faster. There's no way these tyres and wheel inches iron out roots and rocks better than 200mm of travel... And people still love dh bikes.
  • 7 2
 "29+ does mute some of the sensations that I've come to appreciate with 'regular' sized tires - the handling simply isn't as precise in technical terrain"

So the handling manages to be worse than a regular 29er? And this new trend is meant to be a good thing hahaha
  • 5 0
 I know a number of dudes who exclusively ride 29+ (including a ranch style winner and buddy who just broke 300 miles in an 18 hour ride) and love it. Needless to say they all shred hard up and down on all terrain. I am a firm believer that plus size tires are the future in biking whether it be 29" or 27.5". Try it before you knock is a blast.
  • 6 2
 I am seriously impressed! Being a fan of both long travel hardtails and my Krampus I think Trek pulled a brilliant trick here. 420 chainstays on a 29+ is insane! (and don't call it a new wheelsize, 29+ has been a around for a while...)
  • 4 0
 The only thing I dislike about this bike is that it replaces the old Stache, which was a "just right for most riders" 29er. Now we have a pretty darn cool novelty bike that's appealing to a much much much smaller market.
  • 3 0
 Amazing, wouldn't dream of knocking a bike until I'd actually rode one myself. I've got a Krampus and I can tell you now it's only a niche design because the greater bike community hasn't tried 29+. It has single handed put my 29er hard tail and full sus 26er into retirement. I didn't mean it to, it was bought as "just a bike", but it has. Some friends don't like it, some love it, one went out the next day and bought one. If I sessioned dirt jumps or downhill would it replace those specific bike types? No, but it does everything else easily as good if not better than a generic XC or so called Enduro machine. So it's heavier and accelerates slower, big deal. You'd only notice if you were racing away from a start line in a race, which 90% of riders never do. For regular blokes, riding for fun with mates at trail centres or bridleways it is ace. It's even removed my N+1 obsession, for Christ sake!! Good review BTW.
  • 9 2
 I can't tell whether this is a Fat bike, or the new hub standards ... Wink
  • 7 1
 "Muted feeling" and "extra effort" aren't really convincing for this new wheel size.......
  • 1 1
 Lol! My exact feelings. I was considering the trek or a Kona in a all-mountain aggressive hardtail but looks like trek made the decision a bit easier.
  • 13 6
 I don't want to live on this planet anymore
  • 11 3
 Stop this madness.
  • 3 0
 Love or hate the wheel size/tire size, it is promising to see an industry bohemoth like Trek take a stab at what is currently a niche market. Maybe the big boys learned a lesson from the popularity of fat bikes Next thing you know Specialized and Trek will do custom sizing and custom paint and Portland will turn to dust.
  • 3 0
 I'm a big fan of the burlier hardtail, my honzo is one of the most enjoyable bikes I've ever ridden, but dose the experienced rider really need 29+? I've a 2.4 on the front and 2.3 on the rear of the honzo and i couldn't ever imagine needing a wider bite from the tyres for my local trails. and if you do, aren't you encroaching on the kind of terrain that fat bikes are designed for? If you have the want/need for extra beef on your wheels and you have a lazy $4k for tour 4th bike then go all the way man, get a monster of a fatbike!
  • 3 0
 I am seeing a LOT more 29+ bikes out on the trails and at the local races (cross country). Some of them various Stache models, but several other builds as well. This may not be the bike for everyone, especially gravity riders, but it is a great all-around bike for the trails that most people have access to. I have put some miles on my Stache 9 now, and I think Mike's review is spot-on. This bike takes a while to get used to, especially the gyro effect from the wheels at higher speeds (they want to keep going straight, and you have to force it to turn). But, it is great fun to ride, which is what it's all about. I won't be ditching my FS bike anytime soon, but the Stache filled in nicely when it was in the shop for 6 weeks.

Just a couple of additions to the review. Traction in mud is fine, especially slick mud-covered rocks, but sticky mud that cakes to your tires causes an issue. The chain runs quite close to the tire, and mud tends to scrape off into the chain, which then causes the chain to pop off the front ring. I'm working on a plastic doohickey to attach to the chainstay that should remedy this problem. Switching to tubeless got the weight down to just slightly over 26 pounds, but the tubeless setup is a little finicky using the Sun Ringle tape. You MUST get it on even, smooth and straight or you will get leaks through the rim. The tape also doesn't seem to adhere very well. Luckily the standard Gorilla tape is the same width, so I will try that next time around. And, get a good patch kit for holes that sealant won't fill -- tires ain't cheap!
  • 2 0
 I had heard whispers of this bike a while back and my bike shop buddy called me Wednesday and asked me if I wanted a Stache 5. I had just sold my hardtail on Monday so I said yeah. I ordered the last Stache 5 in the country, I saw the list so that's not an exaggeration, and it will be in on Tuesday. I've got a full XTR drivetrain and brakes on the way for it as well as carbon bars, seatpost, saddle, stem, etc. I'm expecting weight to be around 22 lbs once I'm set up tubeless without changing the wheels. I'm currently looking for a set of 30mm inside diameter rims to go on the hubs, which are proprietary because of the width unless I want to spend ungodly amounts of money on I9 hubs. I'm going to get it and race the hell out of it. I'm taking it to Syllamo's Revenge in 2 weeks. Should be a fun ride at least.
  • 2 0
 I own this bike. It is awesome. Beyond what you might think about the bike, it is pure fun, the most fun I've had on xC style bike. With the short chainstay (which I've slammed as tight to the bb as possible )I can manual all day, almost as easy as my DJ bike, and style over 12' long tables, the big fat tires spin fast like 29er and roll larger gnarly roots and rocks than I would dare try on my standard 29er, which has me wanting more technically difficult trails . its fast on open trail, and as capable as a 4" trail bike. It a really playful, burly, capable all around fun bike.
  • 10 8
 Anyone having issues with that bike take note before you throw a stone: love your enemies - whatever there is that you hate about Enduro or Strava, this breed of bikes will kill. Mountain Biking can be fun again, Funduro or what?
  • 6 1
 Dude I'd have a blast just playing around with different tire sizes, stay lengths, etc. Plus, then I wouldn't have to talk totally out my ass in geometry conversations.
  • 5 5
 Geometry conversations give my scrotum additional wrinkles... slack&low, long reach, short dick, it's just a fkng bike damn it. And now with having pro times on your trails, Strava ain't no place for glory baby baby. Just relax and put some really fat tyre on, like you always wanted to, but you needed to buy Ti bolts and carbon bars to be have something to talk about with a-holes on bigger group rides.

I take anything, any standard over any crap that someone shovels pseudo science into my arse with performance label on it. I am only curious what will be the story when 26" will be coming back.
  • 2 0
 Scrotum geometry conversations give me additional wrinkles... slick, low, peach, short, it's just fuckng scrotum. damnit I'm bored tonight
  • 3 1
 "the HexLock QR15 thru axle is still just as fiddly as ever – the concept is simple in theory, but the execution turns reinstalling the front wheel into a more difficult experience than it needs to be." > ok, this I dont get. The concept is simple in theory and practice, works a charm. It's great. It also won the praise of my LBS mechanic when I took my new build in for brake line shortening. Love the HexLock QR15 on my Mattoc. Quick and simple.
  • 1 0
 A bit late to the party... But I really agree, Manitous QR15 is super easy. I asked a friend who have never used it to give it a try, he nailed it on the first try. He said it was the easiest 15mm axle he had used. Do you really think it's that hard @mikekazimer ?
  • 1 0
 @eldsvada - Compared to how easy it is to install the thru-axle on a RockShox or Fox fork, yes, it's much more fiddly.
  • 1 0
 @mikekazimer Really?
I've had both RS and fox, but I must say I prefer the Manitou version. I was expecting it to be a hassle due to the pinkbike review, but I've found it to be super convenient. So much that I struggle to get what's so difficult with it. (that's why I asked my mate to try it, half hoping he would fail).

I guess we're using it wrong Wink

BTW thanks for the response, one of the great things about pinkbike!
  • 4 1
 Here in my shop we been testing fat bikes for a while and the engineers are doing it right it more stable more lighter and quicker we just built a foes mutz and it rock like no other mountain bike. The future is now.
  • 3 0
 While it's not going to be for everyone, this bike is compatible with the Gates Carbon Drive belt. Not too often you get a bike that can do that and not have a split in the seatstay or chainstay.
  • 1 0
 I like how we got little feedback on the boost 110 fork which will likely be a forced upgrade. Don't get me wrong, I can say boost 148 in the back is good, but I don't see how on the front does anything noticeable for your average rider.
  • 1 0
 This is a really late question, doubt it will get seen, but I'm wondering about the sliding dropouts - in the pictures they look all the way back, which is unusual for a review where reviewers seem to prefer short stays. Am I correct that they are back, and if so, there doesn't appear to be alot of extra clearance to move the wheel forward?
  • 3 0
 @robbdj7 - They could still go further back, it's just hard to see because the thru axle is blocking your view. They're set at 420mm, which is as short as possible with the 29+ wheel the bike comes with. If you put something smaller on, they can go further forward, all the way down to 405mm.
  • 1 0
 Cool, thank you.
  • 1 0
 My dilemma is whether to buy this bike this year or next. It seems quite expensive considering that it's a hardtail and the components that are on it. I get that the Boost 148/110 mods required push that price up. Assuming Trek decides to continue building this bike, what kind of pricing decrease do you think I could expect next year? I get that this is a bit of a crystal ball question, but I figured it's worth asking. If I'm looking at another year to save $500 on the Stache 7, then it might be worth it. If it's only $100 then I might as well just buy it now. I guess this is more of a question for people familiar with bike retail patterns.
  • 1 0
 I have been demoing the Stache 9 the past week. Trek hooked me up for the SandBox Showdown- A ride 30 plus mile ride(race for some-drink beer casual ride for others). Tucson AZ offers hundreds of miles of sandy washes. I've spent countless hours riding them on my Santa Cruz Tallboy and run a 2.5" tire. The difference of the extra half inch is incredible. This bike has devoured everything I have thrown it's way. I'm climbing over rocks I've never cleared before, gliding through the deepest sand, and railing single track. I've only found one thing I don't like. When lifting it over fences or into a truck, my finger has been mashed between the fork and the frame. Not that I'm aware of it, it won't happen again.

I am hoping that I get a chance to head up to the snow before I return the bike or that somehow Trek forgets they gave me the Stache 9 and I can keep playing all winter. All in all, I can see this bike replacing the Tallboy as my go to iron horse.
  • 9 5
 Cue up the people who will lose their shit over something new that they wouldn't buy anyway...
  • 5 1
 I'm ecstatic to see this bike! It's got everything I'm looking for with the exception of the press-fit bottom bracket. But hell, close enough!
  • 5 1
 "trying to figure out just how short of a chainstay length was possible"
yeah, let's do a 29+, that's the best solution
  • 1 0
 True, it is impossible to have short chainstays on a 26Smile ... Trek zero ! Smile
  • 2 1
 I don't mean this bike is a stupid idea - shorten chainstay on a 29er reduces its lack of agility which is good- but if the goal was to minimize the chainstay lenght then they should have done this on a 26+.

That being said, it would probably be a good bike for long exploration rides, and I like this geometry / asymetrical frame
  • 3 1
 Looks like I will probably be getting a Kona honzo next season still...the whole "when the wheels are up to speed" part just puts me off.

Please do not make the honzo 29+ Kona!
  • 1 0
 You could always go 27.5+ on the Honzo...
  • 2 1
 Lots of hate here, but I somehow really like this bike despite all the dreaded "standards" and would love to have a go on it. The "normal" Stache was cool too. I think I just have a thing for trail hardtails. Props to Trek for the amount of thought they've put into a simple hardtail frame. Some geeks will be all over this bike trying different wheels and cs lengths Wink
  • 2 1
 Did you really compare cross country skis to powder skis as how much more awesome this is than a regular mountain bike?
That's just a weird comparison...
Sure if you want to ride where there's not much of a mountain bike trail I guess these kinds of bikes are cool.
But otherwise.
They just seem like doughy non agile pieces of crap that aren't very good for shredding.
But I guess most people don't really shred anyway.
  • 2 1
 Is it a bike? Yup. Checks all the boxes.
Can you have fun on it? Yup. Looks like fun...and those I know who ride similar from SoCal to Alaska have fun on this type of bike.
Do people buy 2nd/3rd/4th bikes? Yup. I ride FS-XC/Cyclocross/Road...and borrow the occasional hardtail and 6+ travel bike.
Is it a quiver-killer? Nope. If you think there is such a bike out there, then you need to find the limits for that bike, shatter it, and n+1.
Is it for everyone? Nope. Nothing ever is.

Buy it or not.

Bitch less, ride more.
  • 1 0
 I own a 2013 Stache 7. It just rips. It pops off lips and roots and gives a ton of confidence for people who are learning to get "in the air" (which is the opposite of my 2011 Fuel EX7, which acts like it wants to stay on the ground). This is the bike I put friends on who don't ride or own a bike and want to try riding.

This new bike looks incredible although the clearance of that 29+ is tight. I would highly recommend this (at the 7 spec) for someone about to make the jump into mtb as a hobby especially because of the ability to switch to multiple wheel/tire combinations. This bike is just too playful and confidence inspiring to be called a XC bike. Its truly a trail bike and in the right hands an all-mountain bike. I'll bet you can get a 7spec next spring for around $2200, because I was able to get my 2013 for $1600 (7 mos after release). My next bike will be f/s probably 29 and probably Remedy but I'll never get rid of my Stache, way too much fun.
  • 1 0
 "riders who choose to go the frame only route and use a wheel size different than 29+ can maintain the same geometry by running a longer travel fork."

Why would changing wheel/tire size affect the head angle geometry? Changing the fork length surely would have the effect of steepening/slackening but not wheels. BB height and chainstay length would be of course.
  • 1 0
 I got one of these at the end of '16 for a deal. They weren't selling in my locale. I ride it in heavy rotation - through snow, early and late season conditions and any trails that aren't overly gnarly. Its super fun and very capable - before every ride i choose between this and my yeti sb5c and unless it is a rowdy trail where i want to haul through chundery downhill i pick this...
  • 5 1
 Controversy article of the day
  • 4 1
 i want to see a dh bike proto w/ these wheels and similar but gooey tires- hell give it 10 inches of travel and 4 in sag.
  • 1 0
 A semi fat bike? Hell ya
  • 6 1
 Bikes are rad.
  • 1 0
 I just read on article about a test that retrofitted a set of 27.5+ wheels and tires on an Enduro 29 and tested it against the stock 29" wheels and tires and now this....what is going on out there?
  • 4 0
 Where? I wanna read that.
  • 1 0
 I REALLY like the look of those Specialized tires. looks like they'd have a nice round profile even on 45mm scrappers.
  • 1 1
 Wow 405 mm of CS with 29+, that's nice, frame look like 'candida bikes for street'

I'm totally not a fun of big wheels, and boos format, however bike look nice.

Also i do not want to go fast, i do want have fun on my bike, why should i use thouse f*****g >= 26 wheels?
  • 1 0
 110mm head tube on the XL size. Really? Because tall guys around the world are struggling to get their bars lows enough? Maybe Trek is heavily invested in the headset spacer business.
  • 1 0
 Pretty stoked to get an early go on one of these in the next few weeks. I will say though... that lower chain stay looks horrid. Going to be fun comparing it to my 2015 Kona Honzo to see the difference between the two.
  • 3 1
 Loving a new standard to accommodate a potential 3rd bike at over $3k that is ridden occasionally becuase it's 'fun'. What a world.
  • 7 3
  • 1 2
 I am not a fan of this bike. I am not a fan of + sizes in general. I like fatbikes and I love normal size tire bikes as well. But this isn't a fatbike, or a normal bike, it's in between bike for a very niche market.
Trek just left out a huge group of people who don't want to buy into the new marketing and like bikes based on their own opinions and not opinions shoved down their throats by bike manufacturers.
Sure I guess a lot of people will buy it, but that's not going to sway my opinion.
This is a major disappointment and I thought Trek was better than this.
  • 1 0
 Is the 28.5lb weight with tubes or tubeless? If its with tubes, any idea how much weight would be saved by going tubeless?

  • 1 0
 The weight is with tubes. I'd say at least a pound, if not more, would be saved by going tubeless.
  • 5 2
 Can i have the same in 26+?
  • 2 0
 Surly Instigator 2.0
  • 1 0
 Can't wait for something similar to happen in frame only with normal hubs, but it'll need to have the chainstay/dropout combo for me to be interested. 405-420mm? Wild.
  • 2 2
 I bin ja a Österreicher ... ausgewandert vorübergehend... und i kann ma nid helfen aba i lies immer Drecks Strache... irgendwer? oder nur i?
vielleicht is des ja weil beide a bisl unedig sind?
  • 1 1
 unedig bist nur du, und der Strache aaa... Bike is ursupa, aber tu erst mal fahrn bevorst noerglst...
  • 8 5
 this is the dumbest "trend" yet

kill it with fire
  • 1 0
 Does anyone have an idea about the brand of the helmet he is wearing ? Currently trying to get one ,and it actually looks quite nice !
  • 2 0
 Forget about the wheelsize for a're looking at a 3800$ aluminium hardtail,just like me,right? RIGHT?
  • 1 0
 I would probably demo one of these just to experience how it rides but that's as far my curiosity is going to take me. Not buying into it.
  • 1 0
 I like +size bikes...........they soak up all the bumps on the trail. I'm not sure I would buy a Trek because I'm not a boost hipster
  • 2 0
 So we got Boost, 29ers, and plus sized tires all rolled into one? the internet is gonna have a field day with this one.
  • 1 0
 "The Stranglehold sliding dropouts allow the chainstay length to be adjusted between 405 and 420mm."

Good! This means we can choose single speed.
  • 1 0
  • 2 0
  • 1 0
  • 1 0
 Wow!! those graphics are amazing, they make the bike look so rad... Trek who is your graphic it a kindergartener??? Epic Fail Trek
  • 4 5
 A) ...because fat bikes aren't selling 2) don't more important engineering and tech issues exist, 29+? 3) Is Trek hoping to show up early to this trend party? 4) Chainstay concept looks very interesting
  • 5 0
 4) The chainstays made me think I'd fallen through a vortex back to 1993, my Grandfather had a Klein that looked a lot like that.
Pretty neat bike though and have Pinkbike just announced Manitou's new twenty niner fork?! Ahem... Twenty Niner Mattoc, YES PLEASE!
  • 6 0
 Say what you want but 405mm is crazy short for a 29er.
  • 10 5
 A) Fat bikes are selling so well that every brand with any have sold out their wharehouses of 2015s already and all that's left to buy is what's already in the dealers until well into the fall when the 2016s start delivering. In this region where we now have a few hundred fats rolling around and on pace to be up to a thousand owners by next year. There's already more fat bikes than DH bikes. And Fat biker business is already shaping up to be more important to ski hills/centers than summertime DH bike business.

2) More important to whom? Just because you don't like the idea doesn't mean others feel the same way.

3) Well Trek (via Gary Fisher) led the 29er party. They were late to the 650B party but at least they're willing to be the first major brand to get into the 29+ party.

4) Rocky Mountain's Suzi Q frame, circa 1994 had the one elevated driveside stay for a similar clearance issue reason.
  • 19 3
 This is pinkbike, the kids just want to see last years bike with a new paint job, more travel, and in carbon, but cheaper.
  • 4 1
 Mustache rides anyone?
  • 7 4
 What's that shit ?
  • 2 2
 I have a Cotic Soul that has kept the same geometry since 2003, the chainstays measure 420mm wheel 26 ". Trek and industry 12 years late !!!
  • 4 1
 You do realize that this a bike with nearly a 31" diameter tire, right? Your 26" tire probably only measures 27.1" in diameter. Nah, I'm pretty sure Cotic doesn't offer a 29+ bike with 420mm chainstays, nor will they ever.
  • 12 10
 Fat bikes and these 27.5+/29+ bikes are stupid.
  • 1 0
 Would like to add the review on this bike seems very honest though, good job!
  • 1 0
 Looks like the first 29 plus bike, on which the majority of riders won't have a moustache. And they call it the Stache...
  • 1 0
 Actually Surly had the first 29+ bike in the Krampus, and Surly's kinda a hipster brand, so maybe some moustaches.
  • 1 0
 Got 2010 Gary Fisher Rumblefish, and running 3.0 '' quite close fit, but was great on snow, and lots of flotation .
  • 1 0
 sweet! a 1/2 chub! Love me a chubby. I would buy one, but not as a primary. Looks hella fun.
  • 3 1
 Glad I got my 2015 Stache before it got weird...
  • 1 1
 I feel like I need to be a hipster to ride a bike these days. I can't go into the LBS any more without feeling extremely out of place. The world is changing...
  • 2 1
 can't wait for the inevitable 24"/29"+ plus fat models to come out ......freekin retard bikes.
  • 1 0
 I love how the uses are XC/AM/fun. Wait I thought fun was the point of riding bikes hahaha
  • 2 1
 WTF are my eyes telling my brain here? This bike is like a ginger headed stepchild; why on earth would you want one?
  • 1 0
 As for me,I would rather ride a traditional 26er than buy a new stache9
  • 1 0
 Trail destroying momentum. Classic case of "if you don't know why, they aren't for you."
  • 1 0
 This should be called the Tom Selleck instead of the Stache. Love my Stache but this isn't for me.
  • 1 0
 Would make a fantastic winter rig, here on the Island. Now, just gotta find that $4k that I misplaced...
  • 1 0
 29er Mattoc!!! That's what I am excited about.
  • 1 0
 It's a Magnum, not a Mattoc.
  • 1 0
 "The fork employs a very similar air spring as you'd find inside the Mattoc and Dorado" so while it isn't a Mattoc, it is does have similar traits.
  • 1 0
 what is that valve coming out horizontally behind the dropouts?
  • 1 0
 It's merely a tensioner, the cap just protects legs from getting gouged.
  • 1 0
 Love it, I would single speed rigid that thing. My only gripe is the PFbb
  • 1 0
 I saw this bike yesterday in Santa Cruz
  • 1 0
 Almost $4000 and X1? Not even X01? That seems a bit odd.
  • 1 0
 How about a 26"+ bike with these features? I'd buy it. Just saying.
  • 3 4
 Man Trek went all ballsy releasing this bike. 29er, boost, and fat bike. I demand a Trek boycott.
  • 2 2
 Meh.....not interested until we start getting into the 50+ range.
  • 2 2
 This bike needs to be a single speed
  • 3 2
 Stache 5 ordered.
  • 1 2
 SEXAY colour... my girlfriend is going to want to see that. She's already seen my Vee 650B x 3.25s inflated and asked "why?" and she has a 29er hardtail, a 650B full suspension, a 26er hardtail, and a full fat bike. A buddy rode by today (between the Sherpa unveil and the Stache) and my B+ rear wheel tightly into his 2008 GT peace 9r hardtail frame. Now its side knobs are what contacted the frame and thus was too big to spin but the WTB Trailblazer tire should fit better seeing as how its a 2.3 tread / 2.8 casing and now he's debating a new wheelset for his existing bike (thus being a conversion to B+ from 29er) rather than a full fat bike purchase.
  • 1 0
 What's the going rate for the low-end Stache 29+?
  • 1 0
 $2100 for the Stache 5 with a carbon rigid fork. 1x10 with RaceFace Aeffect crank and a 32T NW ring, 11-36 HG50 cassette, deore shifter & shadow + derailleur, SunRingle Mulefut 50mm rims with cutouts. The only downside to the bike is the fork is 15x100 not 15x110 (as the Suspension fork equipped Stache 7 and 9 you don't have an easy suspension fork upgrade path to work with. Of course the website could be in error as to the fork dropout spacing or there may be more 29+ compatible budget forks coming that are still 100 dropout spacing so as to work with existing 29 plus owners bikes (like Surly Krampus folks).
  • 1 0
 I'm seeing $1759 on the USA site for the Stache 5+, and $939 for the Frame only. I'd buy this frame if it weren't for the Boost rear hub. I've got too many wheels with 142 rear hubs.
  • 1 0
 I'm looking at the cdn site of course... personally I'd prefer Rocky releases the sherpa as a frame only option as I'd rather B+ and full suspension to 29+ hardtail. Rocky is using 142 spacing on the frame (albeit with an 83mm BB).
  • 3 3
 mark allison is so dreamy...
  • 1 0
 Don't bother..... he's only into fat boys
  • 1 1
 I keep fat tires in the fridge...where they belong.
  • 3 6
 Fair play to them....its looks absolutely focking shit! Pieces of shit like this are the end of mountain biking for me. You must have a 29++++++ size head to to want to ride this monstrosity.
  • 1 1
 trek will sell a shitload and warranty 40%.
  • 2 0
 100% of the frames I have ever filed warranty claims for have been replaced with Trek. And I worked at a Trek dealer for 6 years.
  • 9 10
  • 9 3
 Oh, I mean, "Technology and anything except 26inch sucks!"
559b or death.
Below threshold threads are hidden

Copyright © 2000 - 2024. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.186788
Mobile Version of Website