NEW! Carver – TRANS-FAT – Dual Suspension Fatty

Hot off the wire! A exclusive!

Carver Bikes presents their new TRANS-FAT [Ti] dual suspension fatty!


This frame was custom made for one of Carver’s customers with their desired top tube length/geometry and the ability to run a Rohloff  internally geared hub. As with other Carver frames there are a myriad of custom options available!

Carver will be beginning production of  the new Trans-Fat starting immediately. The cost of the production frame will be $2,999 and includes the rear shock. The rear shock is an X-Fusion O2 with a handlebar mounted lockout. The Fork in the photo is a Risse Racing – Trixxxy but the Trans-Fat can also be built to run a Lefty.

Here are the specs:

4″ rear wheel travel
Clearance for tires up to 5″
Frame weight  5.75 pounds in the 18″ size
3/2.5 Aerospace grade seamless titanium throughout
70 degree head angle
73 degree seat tube angle
44 mm. ovalized downtube
Speced for 6.5″ eye to eye rear shock with handle bar mounted lockout
170 mm symmetric or 135 mm offset  (for Rohloff hub) rear dropout spacing
330 mm. Bottom bracket height
8 serviceable cartridge bearing pivots
100 mm threaded bottom bracket
3 sets of water bottle bosses
Rack mounts
1 1/8″, 56/44 mm. tapered, or 49 mm Lefty head tube
31.6 mm seatpost size
34.9 mm seat tube diameter

Please Note :  We work hard to bring our readers the newest and hottest fat-bike news, so if you want to share what you’ve read here on forums or other social media, please copy and paste the URL of this page into your post, so other fat-bikers can discover and enjoy!

43 Responses to NEW! Carver – TRANS-FAT – Dual Suspension Fatty

  1. Joshua November 1, 2012 at 8:42 am #

    What would this bike be good for?

    • martini November 1, 2012 at 8:54 am #

      Uuhhh, Riding?

    • Fleggo November 7, 2012 at 12:41 pm #

      I was a hater, too, until I tested this thing on the insanely technical one-way quagmire behind our bike shop. I rode it the WRONG way while wearing jeans, and didn’t dab. Keep in mind that it’s nearly impossible on my Tallboy going the RIGHT way.

      I won’t buy a Trans-Fat, but I doubt I’ll see anything that can handle trail as easily as this hog.

    • jkg August 30, 2013 at 11:53 pm #

      this bike is heavy; need to use lock out rear shock on steep accents.
      The downhill is heavenly; so sure-footed; cannot miss. No mishaps over roots, rocks, loose gravel, and wet stuff. It is like an off road vehicle when compared to a civic off pavement.
      Of note when the rear shock is locked out on rough trails the fat tires are like riding on a pogo stick. The trampoline effect of the fatties is terrible.
      As soon as the shock is engaged it is the most sure footed downhill ride I have ever had; plows thru anything and at speed; well balanced, safe, and comfortable. A real find for serious downhillers.

  2. JonnyK November 1, 2012 at 8:58 am #

    What wouldn’t this be suitable for?That is stunning!

    • rickyd November 1, 2012 at 12:08 pm #

      Track racing at a velodrome.

      • CaseyB November 1, 2012 at 12:32 pm #

        Tracking racing at the Thunderdome, yo!

    • Hicks November 1, 2012 at 8:34 pm #

      Riding on mud, snow, and sand. If you aren’t planning to ride on those surfaces regularly or can’t afford one just for the novelty then another, more versatile, bike would probably be preferable.

      • Morpheous January 15, 2013 at 9:32 pm #

        These FAT bikes are great for trail riding as well, you can skinny up with 70mm rims and 3.0 tires and rip the dirt as well. Free our mind Neo.

  3. Ernesto_From_Wisconsin November 1, 2012 at 10:25 am #

    Yes! I like!

  4. Fattie November 1, 2012 at 10:37 am #

    full squish fat is silly. a bunch of extra weight and unnecessary travel

    • dana November 1, 2012 at 12:01 pm #

      Oh yee have little idea of what these are capable of with full squishy……..think outside the box and perhaps you’ll see it in action as a 29r with fat tires as the only diff.

    • Surly Shawn November 1, 2012 at 12:20 pm #

      Don’t p*** on other’s parades. I heard that refrain being sung all the time before I bought my first full suspension ‘skinny tire’ bike. If I had the money, I would buy this or at the very least take it for a test ride.

      I like this and hope one day that full suspension fatties become more commonplace.

      • dana November 1, 2012 at 1:13 pm #

        Oh indeed they will, it’s a slow process vs say the 26 /29ers and their evolution but full squish phat is on the horizon f’sho!!

    • mike November 1, 2012 at 6:55 pm #

      As a fatbike myself, I’ve never really seen the point in a full bouncer fatbike. Still bling bling though.

    • Sevo November 26, 2012 at 7:50 pm #

      Fattie-I agree. It’s a lot of extra weight and still doesn’t tackle the possible rebound issues of the fat bike tires. It’s a valid question to ask until we get some rides in on one.

      I think it’s not an issue of thinking outside the box, but asking a valid question of what happens when 1000s of undamped little springs (your tires) rebound at high speed? Only a handful of people can really answer that question.

      Salsa has had a prototype out there for about a year come February I think. I haven’t met anyone who’s put any time on one. There are a lot of questions to be asked.

      I can see some of the crazy sandy/loose trails we have in Colorado being a blast on a full suspended fat bike done right. However I also forsee that being a lot of weight to pedal up a hill too. Kinda will come down to what kind of riding you like to do. Me? fat bike for loose stuff and exploring, my 5″ TRc for full on trail riding. Monstercross for goofing off/everyday riding.

  5. Mojowheels November 1, 2012 at 12:22 pm #

    Duded that is awesome for any riding, even inn the snow….Would love to bomb through the wood on that!!!

  6. Jeff November 1, 2012 at 12:36 pm #

    My God is that thing sick.

  7. toezter November 1, 2012 at 1:52 pm #

    People be hatin’, I’d gladly have one in my arsenal.

  8. Mark Peterson November 1, 2012 at 4:07 pm #

    I am in love with progression and to that end I think this bike is a game changer. Argue all you want,until you unleash a fat bike like a downhill bike and then you will see the light. Not everyone has just one bike. I have 13 and most of them are very specific purpose driven. You grumbling freaks are generating your own stress, ENJOY creep’s.

    Much love to those who push the boundaries

    • dana November 1, 2012 at 7:35 pm #

      Agreed Mark, the fat progession is upon us that marvel at whats to come so you naysayers thinkin these bikes are overkill & slow guess again. The standard fatties are leaving their mark @ more races each time out with the avail traction, cornering etc they bring the whoopass can to the party.

    • Surly Shawn November 3, 2012 at 9:41 am #

      Re: progression.

      All these naysayers sound like they are afraid of change. Some change is good, especially as far as technology is concerned. Without it, we wouldn’t even have bicycles, we would still be riding horses.

      And as Drew says below, ‘if you don’t want it, don’t buy it’!

  9. plumberso November 1, 2012 at 7:36 pm #

    If you lived in aplace like British Columbia or the Alps this would be a god send. If you have smooth trails not full of miles of rock gardens and mainly ride beaches or groomed snow this may be overkill. Either way it is awesome.

  10. Bob November 1, 2012 at 8:50 pm #

    I don’t see a lower-swing arm pivot, is it a flexing chain stay design? or is it just tucked behind the crank?

  11. todd November 1, 2012 at 11:49 pm #

    what’s up with the rear drop out? is this belt ready?

  12. Angry Andy November 2, 2012 at 9:28 am #

    I went with a fat bike specifically get get away from all the associated weight and maintenance issues of suspension, and I’m usually the first guy to ogle over trick technology, but I’ll stick with my squishy tires, no mountains in the Midwest to warrant that much travel. Now if you add a 125 motor to that thing then I might be interested, oh they already make something like that…… It’s called a motorcycle!

  13. Heimatau November 2, 2012 at 12:42 pm #

    Sooo What a bike this the ultimate dream for some off uss

  14. John November 2, 2012 at 5:32 pm #

    I don’t get all the people saying suspension is no benefit on a fat bike. Even at 4 psi I had to put a thud buster on mine just to make it tolerable. I would love to have 4 inches of suspension front and rear. It is pricey but this is an expensive sport.

  15. Saw November 3, 2012 at 3:34 pm #

    I don’t understand all the two dimensional thinking here.
    Slow?! Wait until something like this gets in a downhill race.

  16. KrateKraig November 6, 2012 at 8:12 am #

    Someone asked, What would it be good for?
    Well, it sure would kick ass Every Monday Night in January and February where there will be fat-bike downhill time trials at Alpine Valley Ski Area!

  17. Troy November 6, 2012 at 8:44 am #

    I think it’s great. Count me as another who doesn’t understand all the whining. If you don’t want it, it’s not for you.

    I haven’t spent much time on a fatbike but have ridden one a little. I found it a lot of fun at low speed but quickly overwhelmed when i picked up the pace. Full susp. might make it work at higher speed, or it might not. Only one way to find out!

    Running low pressure and having a couple inches of fat-tire-suspension does indeed take the edge off the bumps, but also reminded me how critical rebound damping is!!

    I’m very curious how a fat bike would ride with a little higher pressure (12-14psi?) and properly damped suspension. Could be a dream.

  18. joeswoods November 6, 2012 at 11:51 am #

    Bike builders should have stoped developing new ideas in the ’80s, full ridgid and 1.95″ tires,thats all you need.

    • Morpheous January 15, 2013 at 9:34 pm #

      How is that telegraph working for you these days? 😉

    • hunter November 14, 2013 at 12:44 am #

      Nice one haha….When I here people ask why suspension on a fatbike I often wonder what kind of terrain these people ride…but out here in the Eastern Sierras this is a great option. Endless your riding Disneyland trails.

  19. Johnny Settle November 7, 2012 at 1:41 am #

    What’s it good for? Riding thru ANYTHING…including my own huge puddle of drool!

    • John November 20, 2012 at 8:15 pm #

      I love it. I get it! I spend any time I can out on my Pugsley while my full suspension “light mountain bike’ gathers dust. Fun factor gallore. I can ride things unimaginable in the past. Add full suspension to my 3.8 nates and some of those rock gardens would be a lot easier on my aging body.
      AMAZING JOB and on my wish list for sure.

      • Blake November 30, 2012 at 5:32 pm #

        I could see this as the next winter downhill bomber, but for me in the Mid-west the Ti-O’Beast is sufficient on a Moonlander platform. But man is that a lot of squish, I am sure if you let someone experiment. There will be a break-through in the next frontier of MTB riding. Its like you could mount a motocross engine on it. Cheers Carver!

  20. Bubbah January 31, 2013 at 4:31 pm #

    To all you mocking fat bikes, did you every stop to think that the point of riding a bike was TO HAVE FUN? The reason why I went to a dually was because it was more fun than my hardtail, not faster, not lighter, not simpler. That a dually fat bike might be heavier, slower, more complex than whatever you’re running is not the point. I’ve never ridden one, but I have no doubt that I’d enjoy it, immensely. ON THE OTHER HAND, just like people resisted tubeless for so long, fat bikes are proving that more volume and lower pressure are actually faster and more capable in a lot of situations:

  21. Sancho April 21, 2013 at 2:01 pm #

    Its bad ass, but I can buy a Harley for the same price bigger tires better suspension and with a v twin motor so WTF?

    • hunter November 14, 2013 at 12:47 am #

      you forgot eat cupcakes and donuts also!!!

Leave a Reply