AWD Fatbike to cross South Pole.

Cool, but seems like a lot of mechanical gimmickry for not much usable improvement. Do fatbikes really suffer that much from loss of traction (which I suppose this bike is intending to address)? Mine sure doesn't, though I don't normally ride in Antarctica. I'd sooner get a standard 5'+ tire fatbike and spend the other couple grand on bikepacking gear. Just my .02.
 
A driven front wheel digs itself through snow - as opposed to a regular wheel that has to plow through instead. A lot loke the difference between a 2wd car and 4wd car in sand. Not sure about the drag of the drive system though on biking.
 
After talking to my friend Eric who has ridden to the South Pole twice as I recall, this has nothing to do with traction, but everything to do with snow conditions. He walked his bike for days with a tether tied to the seat post and his waist to keep the pressure off his arms.
 
My issues with snow biking is mainly floatation, not traction. I'm sure 2WD would help in some instances, but it would be a net loss, in my opinion. More weight = less float (granted, not much weight gain relatively speaking). More complex = less reliable. I'd rather look at making a 10" fat bike than this AWD non-sense.
 
Flotation is the main reason the woman from the UK who rode an ICE built custom fat trike to be the first person to pedal to the pole with less effort than a fat bike. That and the headwinds and crosswinds that created problems for the bike riders weren't really an issue for Maria. She could also keep pedaling at ridiculously slow speeds on the trike whereas most people fall over below 2.5 or 3 mph.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
191,064
Messages
2,932,326
Members
234,995
Latest member
tbnd88
Top