Author Topic: Fargo 2 vs Fargo 3  (Read 4498 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline windhorze

Fargo 2 vs Fargo 3
« on: November 16, 2011, 08:38:51 am »
Hi folks. Wondering if anyone on this thread would like to help me decide between a 2011 Fargo 2 vs the 2012 Fargo 3.

Fargo 2 with SRAM, 2 chainrings, $100 more then 2012 Fagro 3 with Shimano Deore, triple chainring.

I'm planning on using the bike on occasional month long, super remote/exotic adventure tours, the other 11 months/yr. for local fire roads/single track....

would love your feedback!

Offline waynemyer

  • World Traveler
  • *****
  • Posts: 276
  • More PITA than PITA. That's our motto!
Re: Fargo 2 vs Fargo 3
« Reply #1 on: November 18, 2011, 12:30:19 pm »
I took delivery on a 2012 Fargo 2 two weeks ago and have been shaking it out with S24O trips. If the crankset on the Fargo 2 is the FSA comet, I say go with the Fargo 3.

There is just a rash of not-quite-enough-range coupled with proprietary lock-in with the 10-speed, 2-ring drivetrain. The SRAM Apex shifters are plenty good and the wide range/close ratios of the 11-36 cassette are pleasant. But the FSA Comet crankset makes for a low that is not low enough (for fully loaded touring) and a high that is definitely not high enough. I can spin 180+ and I regularly run out of high end. Replacing the chainrings is a pain because there are almost no worthwhile variations on the 86mm BCD chainrings. Changing out this crankset with something compatible presents a bit of a challenge. It's doable, but not optimal.

The advantage of the front derailleur on the Fargo 2 is its capacity (22T with a 44T max ring). You can conceivably use a 64/104mm BCD crankset with  24T and 40T rings to get range. But you're looking at another $100+.

Oh, and I find the Thudbuster seatpost to be entirely unnecessary and excessive.

I beat up on the Fargo 2 component spec because I am really finicky. But in truth, it's plenty good. I changed out a bunch of parts already to dial it in to my preferences. If I was going to do it again, I would have bought the Fargo 3, though.
waynemyer.com
warmshowers.org  (user:waynemyer)

Offline Pat Lamb

Re: Fargo 2 vs Fargo 3
« Reply #2 on: November 18, 2011, 01:50:10 pm »
The SRAM Apex shifters are plenty good and the wide range/close ratios of the 11-36 cassette are pleasant. But the FSA Comet crankset makes for a low that is not low enough (for fully loaded touring) and a high that is definitely not high enough. I can spin 180+ and I regularly run out of high end.

Stock on the Fargo 2 is a 27-39 front, 12-36 rear, right?  Running that through Sheldon Brown's gear calculator, I come up with 50.4 mph at a cadence of 180.  If you regularly run out of high end, you are indeed a very strong cyclist.  Are you sure you don't spin 90?  Then you'd only spin out at 25 mph, which is on the edge of where I'd coast, particularly with a load.

Low end, 22 inches is kind of borderline.  I guess it depends how strong a cyclist is, the terrain they ride in, the load, etc.  Personally, I'd rather go a bit lower.

Offline waynemyer

  • World Traveler
  • *****
  • Posts: 276
  • More PITA than PITA. That's our motto!
Re: Fargo 2 vs Fargo 3
« Reply #3 on: November 18, 2011, 02:32:43 pm »
I should have offered more context: I can readily spin over 180 on rollers (the cadence meter doesn't read any higher than 180). On the road, I can't get this bike over 42MPH on my regular descents whereas I can hit 52MPH with my other bikes. Any way you slice it, the top end is too low.
waynemyer.com
warmshowers.org  (user:waynemyer)

Offline bicycleboulevard

SRAM vs Shimano
« Reply #4 on: January 09, 2024, 11:52:43 pm »
Shimano's popularity among both casual and professional cyclists speaks to its quality, while SRAM is also highly regarded for its innovative and fresh gear, as evident in its presence in major races alongside Shimano, showcasing both brands as top-notch in the cycling world.

Please visit this link if you want to know more details: https://www.bicycleboulevard.com/sram-vs-shimano/

Offline canalligators

Re: Fargo 2 vs Fargo 3
« Reply #5 on: January 13, 2024, 09:40:46 am »
I should have offered more context: I can readily spin over 180 on rollers (the cadence meter doesn't read any higher than 180). On the road, I can't get this bike over 42MPH on my regular descents whereas I can hit 52MPH with my other bikes. Any way you slice it, the top end is too low.

Your call, but…  pedaling much over 25 mph, your energy added will mostly get burned up as wind friction.  On day rides it’s one thing, but do you need that extra speed when touring?  Another aspect is severity of crash.  I did many 40+ descents on my transam (fastest 53), but after a while I thought better of it.  At those speeds, I should be wearing body armor and a motorcycle helmet.

I thought of changing the big ring on our ‘bent tandem from 52 to 50, to get less redundancy, but the 52 is handy on a fast descender like that bike.  Still, I stop pedaling about 25 mph.  Also, stoker is uncomfy at higher speeds, so I keep it 30 or less.

But like I said, your call.