2016 trek fuel ex 8 29 geometry

Like most sites, this site uses cookies to make it work. By continuing to use the site you accept our cookie policy . You won’t be shown this message again :)

You are using a browser that does not support javascript. Some aspects of this site may not work as intended.

We've got 11,000+ bikes in the comparison database. Find another?

Trek Fuel EX 29 2016

Prove Humanity: Please click here to start .

Measurements are in millimeters and degrees.

• Bike name and year
• Geometry table
• Add an image

Problem?  Flag for Review or

If you like the site, can we ask a favour?

Click now, buy soon, and we'll get a few pennies.

Chain Reaction Cycles - Wiggle - Rose

Thank you! Bob & Dave

Also!   Search by Stack and Reach

You can now search the database by numbers .

Find bikes that match your geometry criteria.

Tested: Trek Fuel EX 8 29 2016

The not-so-minor details.

Trek Fuel EX 8 29

Trek Bikes Australia

AUD3,499.00

Size tested:

Great handling. Neat improvements over previous model. Proven Trek suspension performance. Very easy to get setup well.

Reasonably heavy.

Everybody has a word which they chronically mis-type. For this reviewer, it’s the word ‘fuel’… about 30% of the time, my fingers will key in the spelling ‘feul’, pushed into another typo by some inexplicably entrenched neurological pathway. While we battle with typing the word, we sure as hell didn’t battle with this bike: the 2016 Trek Fuel (yay, got it first time!) EX8 29 is a solid trail companion, and showcases some excellent improvements from the previous iteration of this bike.

We’re well placed now to comment on this bike’s performance too, having spent a year on both a 2015 Fuel 29er, and 2015 and 2016 versions of the Fuel EX 9.8 27.5.

[divider]What is it and who’s it for?[/divider]

While some brands are going all-in with 27.5, others like Trek still feel that 29″ hoops are going to remain popular and desirable beyond the realms of the XC race category. The confidence, traction and generally sure-footedness of a 29er with trail bike geometry does still make it the ideal platform for a lot of riders. Trek have reinforced this viewpoint by investing in reworking the 29er version of the Fuel frame.

Coming in at under three and a half grand, the EX8 29 sits at a price point that makes it the first ‘serious’ mountain bike for a lot of riders, and as such it needs to be able to handle the demands of a rider who suddenly has equipment that will let them push their limits a lot further. We think it nails it, delivering with a mix of proven Trek tech (the ABP/Full Floater suspension for instance) and new innovations (like the Boost hub spacing) which have facilitated some welcomed improvements to this bike’s geometry and handling that make it even more confidence inspiring.

Aluminium trail bikes mightn’t be a sexy category, but they are the bread and butter of the mountain bike industry. And bread and butter is still freakin’ delicious, especially as a pudding.

[divider]The frame: Big chop, less flop, more BB drop.[/divider]

Until you inspect closely or get out the tape measure (everybody does that, right?) you could easily overlook the changes that Trek have made to the Fuel 29er frame. First up, it gets Boost rear dropout spacing, with the rear hub a whopping 148mm wide. The extra width not only allows the rear wheel to be made stiffer, but because the chainline is shifted outward slightly too, it helps solve some of the tyre clearance issues that plague 29ers.

Long, tech-nerd story cut short, Boost spacing has allowed Trek to chop a massive 18mm off the length of the Fuel 29er’s chain stays.

At the same time, the rear end is stiffer too, alleviating two of our main gripes with the previous Fuel 29er; we never really got comfy with the super long rear end on earlier versions of this bike, and the rear end ‘twang’ robbed it of confidence. In comparison, this bike is crazy solid out back, and feels a lot better balanced too, with more wheelbase out in front, and less trailing you.

The Fuel 29er gets some geometry adjustment too for 2016, via Trek’s simple Mino-Link system. In the slacker setting, the head angle is a stable 68.8-degrees, compared to 69.5 on the 2015 bike. The bottom bracket is 4mm lower too. Put all these ingredients – stiffer, slacker, lower, shorter stays – into the melting pot and you get tasty blend that gives riders more confidence. And as we stressed before, in this category and price point, that should be the performance priority.

The only serious gripe we have with this frame (and we mention it in every Trek review) is the ABP skewer. It hangs out the back of the bike like some kind of anchor, smashing into rocks willy nilly. Please hire some smart engineer to fix this! Water bottle clearance is also super tight, and a 500ml bottle is a real squeeze.

[divider]All the right bits for a good time[/divider]

It’s not just the frame which contributes to the Fuel’s increased confidence, but a whole bunch of smart spec choices too. A 750mm-bar and 70mm stem combo is a real winner, giving you a strong position over the front end, and the Bontrager XR3 tyres are a proper 2.3″ width as well.

Of course a dropper post is a must on this kind of bike now, and the KS LEV on the Fuel works well. Being cable operated, it’s easy enough to maintain too.

Even though the Shimano 10-speed SLX shifters feel a little clunky (especially in comparison to the new 11-speed XT gear), the 2×10 drivetrain will suit most. In an ideal world, we’d go a single chain ring, and fit something like a Praxis 11-40 cassette, to simplify and lighten the bike a bit.

Shimano’s affordable Deore brakes feel a million bucks! They don’t have a huge amount of bite or raw power, but they’re super consistent and have a light, precise lever feel that’s easy to modulate.

[divider]Skinny legs[/divider]

Just like the rear end, the fork also gets Boost hub spacing, with 110mm-wide dropouts. The stance of the fork is noticeably wider, like it’s been riding a horse, but the legs are still only 32mm. With all the other tweaks that have been made to improve the bike’s stiffness and confidence, we’d have loved to see a 34mm-legged fork on this bike.

[divider]Instant gratification[/divider]

One hallmark of a quality bike is the length of time it takes to get comfortable and feel like you’ve got the setup dialled. With the Fuel EX8 29, it was seconds, not minutes or hours. Something about the Full Floater suspension system makes it incredibly easy to get right, or very close to it. While other bikes will punish you with a harsh or soggy ride if your suspension pressures are a little off, Trek’s system seems to handle a much bigger margin of error without issue. A quick check of the suspension sag and you’re 95% of the way there, with only fine tuning to do down the track. The same with the fork too, which might lack the more supportive damping of more expensive FOX offerings, but is very easy to get balanced with the rear end.

The handling is similarly simple to live with, and a marked improvement over previous Fuel 29ers. We always found the long rear end of the older Fuel 29ers made the bike feel like it needed to be steered through corners, and leaning it over wasn’t so easy. The 2016 bike doesn’t have any of those negative traits.

Whether it be getting onto the tyre side knobs, jumping or manualling, the new geometry makes things much more fun.

[divider]Buttery and gentle[/divider]

“Gentle” was a word that another rider used to describe the Fuel’s suspension, and it’s a pretty apt term for it. Both fork and shock are very smooth in the early stages of their travel, and  have a pretty linear feeling. More aggressive riders, or those who like really supportive suspension to work the terrain, might find things a bit too ‘plush’ or isolating, but we don’t really think that’s this bike’s intended rider. Most folk buying this bike will be blown away by how well this bike smoothes out the trail, and that’s what it’s suspension is optimised to do.

[divider]Chuggy on the climbs[/divider]

Because it’s not a light bike, climbing isn’t the Fuel’s forte, and you’ll want to use the shock lockout lever too. We didn’t find time to convert the wheels over to tubeless, but it’s easily done using Bontrager’s rim strips (the tyres are tubeless ready) and that would have saved some rotating weight and likely improved climbing performance too. At least with the 2×10 gearing you have a good low-range gear should you need it.

[divider]Overall[/divider]

We realise we’ve spent a lot of this review comparing this bike with its predecessor, but that’s only because we’re really impressed with how Trek have made what was already a good bike even better. Great handling, comfort and control galore, excellent suspension and a price point that won’t see you eating sardines and rice for a year either.

• Submit for Review
• Terms & Conditions

Enjoy reading this?

Get similar articles delivered directly to your inbox

• Forum Listing
• Marketplace
• Advanced Search
• Community Help Section
• Archived Discussions

2016 Trek Fuel EX8 29er review (long)

• Add to quote

Good review. Thanks for sharing. I had a chance to demo both the Fuel EX and the Top Fuel a couple months back. I was very pleased with the quality of the suspension on both bikes. They both provide excellent traction, climb well, and descend well. Handled W. VA/W. NC style rock with ease. Not the flashiest bikes out there, and like Specialized or Giant, there are some people that don't like them simply because they are a massive company. But they did their homework, and did it well. If they'd actually had a TF 9.8 available when I bought my Yeti, I'd be on a Trek (and I love my Yeti). Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk  

I am prone to the "boutique" thing and have owned one of nearly every brand you could name. But for me and my terrain, both Specialized and Trek build dialed rigs that I can beat the snot out of and have fun doing it. Actually, met a guy from Asheville on National yesterday and he gave me some beta on Pisgah riding. I'm taking a riding vacation out there this spring and looking forward to a different sort of tech riding.  

The other thing is that, because they make and sell so many bikes, if you break a rear triangle 3 or 4 years down the line, you'll probably get the right color replacement for your frame. They can afford to keep a lot in stock. Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk  

Thanks for the info. I'm actually in process of owning this exact bike. I'm not sure Ill be going as hard on it like it sounds you were but its good to know that I can if needed. Sounds like it holds up nicely  

Any chance you could compare it to the Following some? If memory serves you were a big fan of the phantom.  

I was/am a huge fan of the Phantom. I was not a fan of the Following; I just couldn't ride that bike very well.  

Tell me more! The Following gets glowing reviews everywhere and I must admit is a bit of a 'grail' bike for me. I've now got an 2016 EX8 and always thought I'd look to upgrade in a few years to the Evil. How do you compare the 2 bikes?  

First off, thanks for a review that detailed. A question, then a mildly coherent rant, then a question: With the geometry change (but minimal cockpit sizing changes), do you find yourself riding more towards the front of this bike when compared to your E29? As one of the folks who really will bang on about the limitations of the Fox32 fork in the mid-travel 29er guise, a lot of that has to do with the damping, and your interpretation that the Fit4 has something to do with it is probably spot on. My experience with it was atrocious not only because I'm 40lb heavier at roughly the same height, but in the OC Evo cartridge version, the high speed compression and mid-range support were both so bad that when combined with that bit of flex you're observing, it's a very different sort of sketchy feeling (dives into the travel, moves rider CoG forward, and from that point I'm going to be perpetually critical of the lateral and fore/aft fork rigidity). With a better damper, a lot of those issues go away [in my case I just moved that fork to my hardtail, added some oil to reduce air spring volume and run it with more air pressure; it's not super plush over small chunder, but even the lamest F32's out there can be efficient and racy. I really want to see what the one I have will do with a FIT damper when I finally service the poor thing. Also, how do you have the shock set now?  

tehllama said: First off, thanks for a review that detailed. A question, then a mildly coherent rant, then a question: With the geometry change (but minimal cockpit sizing changes), do you find yourself riding more towards the front of this bike when compared to your E29? Click to expand...

Great review Blatant and thanks for sharing. I'm in your same position right now. I've also been looking for a short-ish travel (120mm range) 29er for a while, but instead I wanted to save my Enduro 29 (great bike indeed) just for the rough rides and pick the new one for my everyday rides. I ended up choosing a Fuel EX 9.9 as a primary ride and left the E29 as a secondary/backup. Fuel EX 9.9 is stratospheric. Light and rigid indeed, so super fast. Too early for me to go through a deep analysis because I have ridden once the new toy, but the feeling is great. Max  

tehllama: Interesting question. I'll be honest: I don't know about my body position. Spatial awareness problem? Maybe. It's not something I'm paying attention to. I can say the bike feels "right." And maybe that's the best answer of all. I sort of sit in the pocket where I'm supposed to and let the bike do its thing. I just leave the shock in Trail mode all the time now. Supposedly that's how the Reaktiv thing works best. Look, frankly I'd love to be talked into keeping the Fox 32. The Fit4 damping really is quite nice. I have a tendency to overbuild bikes that are meant to serve a different purpose. I don't want a mini-E29. And on tamer trails, I don't really notice the flex at all.  

Berserker: I don't want to get too derailed in a this vs. that debate. I'm pretty clearly an outlier in regards to the Following. With my body type and terrain, I tend to not get along with bikes that have super-slack seat angle and really low stack. I thought the Evil was a beautiful bike, draws a lot of attention, and I thought it climbed well, particularly if you're a standing climber (I'm not). I did not care for the suspension. For reference, both the Fuel and the Pivot M429Trail (hell, even my Phantom with an Avy shock) both felt more deep, plush and controlled than the Evil. But mostly, I couldn't make the bike turn at speed like I'm used to. I think pretty clearly that can be attributed somewhat to the lower stack (had the exact same problem on my Knolly Warden) and my personal riding style. I just don't weight the front enough to make bikes that style of bike work properly.  

You know, I hesitated to say it, but I had the exact same feeling as Varaxis in regard to the Following. This is purely anecdotal and will certainly be countered by someone with a different experience, but I'll say it anyway: I think the Evil is much more suited to flow-type trails, steep-fast-bermy-jumpy. I found it to be very easily undone on the trails that I ride (real gnar, ledges, square edges, scree).  

Blatant said: trails that I ride (real gnar, ledges, square edges, scree). Click to expand...

Ive had my Fuel EX 8 since Nov and have put 250km on it so far (summer here in Oz). Took me a while to get rear shock setup right as I struggled to get rebound set for descending and general trail riding. Would be good for one but not the other. Finally found an in between that I'm happy with. The Following discussion above is interesting to me as the bike has such a great range of terrain it can handle, that it pushes me to ride more DH style trails than I previously did on my more XC bike. But I've quickly hit the limit of the steep head angle (68.4°) and often wish it was a bit slacker (ex 9 / following). But then I ride some tight switchback climbs and realise if the HA was any slacker then I'd struggle to keep the front wheel tracking. So this bike seems to have a slightly more XC bias compared to other 120mm travel bikes with slacker angles. It's an individual preference that people will probably have to test different bikes to decide if it suits them. But I do agree that if you want to ride natural trails at least 50% of the time then this bike does it very well.  

One thing to note in the review is that he ditched those Bonty entry level version tires right away. The Bonty Team Issue level tires are top tier, but the Experts are about as good as Schwalbe's and Conti's budget line in comparison.  

Varaxis said: One thing to note in the review is that he ditched those Bonty entry level version tires right away. The Bonty Team Issue level tires are great, but the Experts are about as good as Schwalbe's and Conti's budget line in comparison. Click to expand...

I'd rate the Experts as OK as they are the same compound just lower TPI. Conti budget lines have harder/less grippy compound generally. I'm keeping mine until they need replacing. Then would consider Ardent/Ikon combo which I've used in the past. I prefer the Ardent Race but hoping they release a wider version than 2.2 like the Ikon has - 2.35 is a much better tire.  

Yep: The store gave me a little credit for the tires, so the stockers were removed and replaced immediately. One look told me they wouldn't last 15 minutes on our sharp rocks. tehllama: The new Fox damper is pretty sweet. I haven't been a fan of Fox stuff overall, but I'm becoming more of a believer. 12snap: Happy to compare the Fuel to the Phantom. I really, really loved the Banshee; it stands as one of my favorite bikes. In my opinion, the two aren't really in the same category, despite what the travel numbers suggest. The Phantom is a burly, heavy, super-stiff trail destroyer. It's a big bike. And fast. Did I mention heavy? This may sound crazy, but the E29 and Phantom are very similar in style and purpose. I was very fast on the Phantom and it climbed well. Big fan of the KS Link. The Trek is very much more of a traditional trail bike. It does everything pretty well, it's snappy and pretty playful. The Phantom is a war machine. The two don't occupy the same space for me. The Banshee is a conundrum. It's totally overkill to pair it with, say, an E29 because they're so similar in ride quality. But there's no getting around the really short-travel on certain trails and in certain situations. The Trek is much more "useful" -- at least in my situation -- as a trail bike that's different enough from my everyday rig that it fills the proper niche in my stable. Hope that helps.  

The EX 9 hit the value sweet spot for me. The 34mm FiT4 fork is fantastic, and I want wanted a SRAM 1 by drivetrain. Pedaling is surprisingly bob-free, maybe due to Reaktiv? So far, the Stealth dropper has been great too. The Roam wheels set up tubeless with just a floor pump.  

Look over in the Trek forum section, someone mentioned you can get Hope hub pawls that will install into your roam wheels. Not interested in SE5/4/3 tyre combo?  

I agree the factory tires hold the bike back a little. It still handles great, and when they do break loose it is very predictable, but i will definitely be stepping up to a more agressive tire when these wear out. They arent bad enough to just chuck them imo though.  

• ?            
• 15.5M posts
• 515.9K members

Top Contributors this Month

Vibrations of fuel-element bundles in VVER fuel assemblies excited by turbulent coolant flow

• Published: 21 December 2012
• Volume 113 , pages 153–162, ( 2013 )

Cite this article

• Yu. G. Dragunov 1 ,
• V. I. Solonin 1 ,
• V. V. Perevezentsev 1 &
• I. V. Petrov 2  

121 Accesses

3 Citations

Explore all metrics

Complex experimental studies of hydrodynamically excited vibrations of fuel-element bundles have been performed on full-scale models of VVER-440 fuel assemblies. Pressure pulsations were used as the main hydrodynamic characteristic of turbulent coolant flow according to the effect of its load on the fuel-element surfaces in the flow. Realizations of the random hydrodynamic loads causing vibrations of fuel elements are obtained on the basis of multi-point measurements of pressure pulsations along the perimeter of the outer row of the fuels elements in a bundle.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

The Effect of Spacer Grids on the Formation of Added Mass under the Bending Vibrations of a Fuel-Element Bundle in a Covered Fuel-Element Assembly of a VVER-440 Reactor

F. D. Sorokin, V. V. Perevezentsev & E. S. Krutko

Transverse Transport and Heat Transfer in Smooth VVER Fuel-Rod Bundle with Cellular Spacer Grid

P. V. Markov & V. I. Solonin

Longitudinal Displacement of a Fuel Rod Nonfixed in the Support Grid under the Conditions of Hydromechanical Vibration of VVER-440 Reactor Fuel Assemblies

V. I. Solonin & V. V. Perevezentsev

E. S. Saakov, S. I. Ryasnyi, and V. U. Khairetdinov, “Development of full-scale experiments for commissioning reactor facilities in nuclear power plants,” in: Ensuring the Safety of Nuclear Power Plants with VVER: Collection , Podolsk (2007), Vol. 2, pp. 17–23.

K. V. Frolov, N. A. Makhutov, S. M. Kaplunov, et al., Dynamics of the Structures of Hydro-Aero-Elastic Systems , Nauka, Moscow (2002).

Google Scholar  

V. I. Solonin and V. V. Perevezentsev, “Hydrodynamically excited vibrations of a fuel-element bundle with different coolant flow characteristic at the inlet into a VVER-440 fuel assembly,” Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved. , No. 3, 23–29 (2006).

V. V. Makarov, A. V. Afanasiev, and I. V. Matvienko, “Modal analysis of models of VVER fuel assemblies with force and kinematic excitation of vibrations,” in: Securing the Safety of Nuclear Power Plants with VVER: Collection , Podolsk (2007), Vol. 2, pp. 137–148.

V. V. Perevezentsev, V. I. Solonin, and F. D. Sorokin, “Nonstationary hydrodynamic loads and vibrations of fuel-element bundles in VVER-440 fuel assemblies,” Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved. Yad. Energetika , No. 4, 23–29 (2008).

V. V. Perevezentsev, “Vibrations and damage to fuel elements in turbulent coolant flow in VVER fuel assembly,” Bezop. Tekhnosf. , No. 6, 11–17 (2011).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Bauman Moscow State Technical University, Moscow, Russia

Yu. G. Dragunov, V. I. Solonin & V. V. Perevezentsev

Machine-Building Plant, Elektrostal, Moscow Oblast, Russia

I. V. Petrov

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Additional information

Translated from Atomnaya Énergiya, Vol. 113, No. 3, pp. 127–134, September, 2012. Original article submitted March 20, 2012.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Dragunov, Y.G., Solonin, V.I., Perevezentsev, V.V. et al. Vibrations of fuel-element bundles in VVER fuel assemblies excited by turbulent coolant flow. At Energy 113 , 153–162 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10512-012-9610-x

Download citation

Received : 20 March 2012

Published : 21 December 2012

Issue Date : January 2013

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10512-012-9610-x

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Pressure Pulsation
• Fuel Element
• Fuel Assembly
• Coolant Flow
• Hydrodynamic Load
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• History of cooperation
• Areas of cooperation
• Procurement policy
• Useful links
• Becoming a supplier
• Procurement
• Rosatom newsletter

© 2008–2024Valtiollinen Rosatom-ydinvoimakonserni

• Rosatom Global presence
• Rosatom in region
• For suppliers
• Preventing corruption
• Press centre

Rosatom Starts Life Tests of Third-Generation VVER-440 Nuclear Fuel

• 16 June, 2020 / 13:00

This site uses cookies. By continuing your navigation, you accept the use of cookies. For more information, or to manage or to change the cookies parameters on your computer, read our Cookies Policy. Learn more

• Rocky Mountain
• Specialized
• YT Industries
• Allied Cycle Works
• Black Market
• DALLINGRIDGE
• Diamondback
• Early Rider
• EVO Bicycles
• Growler Bikes
• Guerrilla Gravity
• iGO Electric
• Intense 951
• Juiced Bikes
• View all brands
• Production Privee
• Rad Power Bikes
• Rambo Bikes
• Riese & Müller
• Soul Fast E Bikes
• Spark Cycleworks
• State Bicycle Co.
• Structure Cycleworks
• Surface 604
• Van Nicholas
• Vintage Electric
• We Are One Composites

• Cross Country

• All Mountain

Trek Fuel EX 9.8 29

• AUS $ NZD $ USD $ CAD $ GBP £ EUR €

Colour / Powder Blue

Size / 15.5, 17.5, 18.5, 19.5, 21.5, 23"

At a glance

Where to buy.

Specifications

• Frame OCLV Mountain Carbon main frame & seatstay, alloy chainstay, ABP, Boost148, Full Floater, EVO link, E2 tapered head tube, Mino Link, Micro Truss, Control Freak internal routing, Carbon Armor, PF92, ISCG 05, G2 Geometry, 120mm travel
• Wheels DT Swiss M1900, tubeless strips & valves, Boost110 front, Boost148 rear
• Wheel Size 29"
• Tires Bontrager XR3 Team Issue, Tubeless Ready, 120tpi, aramid bead, 29x2.30"
• Crank Shimano Deore XT, 36/26
• Front Derailleur Shimano Deore XT, high direct mount
• Rear Derailleur Shimano Deore XT, Shadow Plus
• Shifters Shimano Deore XT, 11 speed
• Brakeset Shimano Deore XT hydraulic disc
• Handlebar Bontrager Rhythm Pro, OCLV Carbon, 31.8mm, 15mm rise
• Saddle Bontrager Evoke 3, hollow titanium rails
• Seatpost RockShox Reverb Stealth, 2-bolt head, 31.6mm, zero offset
• Stem Bontrager Rhythm Pro, 31.8mm, 0 degree
• Headset FSA IS-2 carbon, E2, sealed alloy cartridge

Q: What size wheels does the 2016 Trek Fuel EX 9.8 29 have?

The 2016 Trek Fuel EX 9.8 29 has 29" wheels.

Q: What size 2016 Trek Fuel EX 9.8 29 should I get?

No comments on this bike yet. Why not be the first?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Want more MTB in your mailbox?

The latest on mountain bikes delivered straight to your mailbox.

More Bikes in Range View All

Trek Fuel EX 7

Trek Fuel EX 5

Trek Fuel EX 9.8 GX AXS

More trail bikes view all.

Salsa Timberjack XT Z2 29

Centurion No Pogo F860i

Jamis Dakar A2

Deals view all, view all deals, recent posts view all.

Blackburn Honest Digital Pressure Gauge Review

It's 2020 people. The squeeze and bounce test doesn't cut it anymore (and this is…

Comparing Mountain Bikes

Mountain Bikes are complicated machines. They have parts from hundreds of different manufacturers, come in…

Undomestic Mountain Bikes: Here’s what we know

Update March 2020: Undomestic has announced that they are manufacturing frames "at this moment" and…

Send Feedback

Have a suggestion? Looking for a bike that's not on MTB Database? Or perhaps you've spotted an error?

We'd love to hear from you. Let us know with the form below.

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience possible. Learn more.

About MTB Database

Explore, search and compare thousands of the world’s best mountain bikes here on Mountain Bike Database.

Compare prices, components, suspension, reviews, images and more on current and past MTB’s. You can even share reviews, comments and questions on mountain bikes. View and compare a huge selection of bikes from brands such as Trek , Specialized , Giant , Santa Cruz , Norco and more .

We strive to provide accurate and up-to-date information for mountain bikes on MTB Database. If you’ve spotted any issues, please let us know . We also include helpful tools, such as our frame size calculator, to assist you in choosing the right mountain bike. Bear in mind that these tools serve as a guide and simply provide a general indication. Refer to information provided by your bike manufacturer for the most applicable information for your bike.

Bikes By Brand

Bikes by year, bikes by riding style, bikes by wheel size, popular bikes.

• 2022 Specialized Epic EVO Comp
• 2022 Trek Marlin 6
• 2022 Specialized Enduro Comp
• 2022 Specialized S-Works Epic EVO
• 2022 Specialized Epic EVO Expert
• 2022 Giant Fathom 29 1
• 2022 Trek Marlin 7

Latest Bikes

• 2023 Commencal SUPREME DH V5 SIGNATURE 70'S
• 2023 Orange Phase 29 Factory
• 2022 Commencal META SX V4 TEAM Frame
• 2023 Commencal SUPREME DH V5 SIGNATURE LTD
• 2023 Commencal META SX V4 - Frame
• 2023 Riese & Müller Swing4 vario
• 2023 Riese & Müller Swing4 silent

• Fuel EX 8 Gen 5

• Rider Notes

2016 Trek Fuel EX 7 29

A 29″ aluminum frame full suspension trail bike with upper mid-range components. Compare the full range

For This Bike

View more similar bikes →

A bike with lower gearing will be easier to ride up steep hills, while a higher top end means it will pedal faster down hills.

Fuel EX 7 29

Similar Bikes

(descending)

Add custom gearing

While this Trek Fuel EX 5 may look like a roller skate on wheels, complete with disco-tastic 'anthracite' metallic grey finish and chunky platform shoes reminiscent of the Spice Girls’ heyday, it does cover a particular niche between ‘trail’ and ‘cross-country’, and it does it very well on a respectable budget. Review: Banshee Phantom GX - a short travel machine with hardcore intentions Buying your first mountain bike?

Read Review

Nov 2017 · Will Hilbert

Take a look at the new Fuel EX and you will quickly see Trek has fully redefined the model. The 2016 Fuel Ex 29 was a step in the right direction, but it was a timid half-hearted step that left the rider wondering what if…? What if it came spec’d with a stiffer fork, more travel and a slacker headtube? The team at Trek delivered and the 2017 bike answers these questions. It now allows the use of 29” or 27.5+ wheels and is one of the stiffest frames in the category, featuring a totally new geometry that’s slacker and longer than its predecessor.

Mar 2017 · Wil Barrett

The Fuel EX is Trek's most popular full suspension bike. So, is the 2017 version the best yet? Wil gets stuck in to find out.

Earlier this year, the Fuel EX received rapid fire updates that first introduced a 27.5+ version then quickly made it the standard model by adding 29er wheels and tires for most of the stock builds. The frame was all new for both, bumping travel to 130mm, and it effectively did away with the standard 27.5 …

Jul 2016 · Christoph Bayer

Trek Fuel EX features new geometry, a new frame, and a revised spec. We’ll reveal whether Trek’s streamlining has been worth it.

Jul 2016 · Sjones

Crazy fast 130mm trailbike from Trek

Jun 2016 · Josh Patterson

It appears Trek’s design team has been paying close attention to the desires of trail riders, many of whom have been gravitating toward short-travel 29ers with slack geometry, and redesigned the Fuel EX accordingly. . .

Spirited handling

Good suspension performance

Ultra low bottom bracket might not suit everyone

Proprietary headset

Mar 2016 · Paul Burwell

The Trek Fuel Ex Jr is a first time full-susser for the little ripper

Tons of standover clearance; quality suspension components; plenty of stopping power; wide gearing range; proper mountain bike tyres.

Heavy; needs a shorter stem; brake levers lack reach adjustment for smaller hands.

Last updated 29 June Not listed for 2,473 days