Fietsvergelijk

Fafrees F26 Carbon M vs Shengmilo S600

Comparison 2026Fat Bikes

82

Fafrees F26 Carbon M

Fafrees · Premium fatbike

1499.00

VS
74

Shengmilo S600

Shengmilo · Mountain fatbike

1399.00

Our verdict

Based on our weighted scoring, the Fafrees F26 Carbon M edges out the Shengmilo S600 with an overall score of 82/100 against 74/100. It scores particularly well on motor performance (86/100) and terrain grip (84/100), making it the better all-round pick in Fat Bikes.

The Shengmilo S600 remains a sensible alternative if price is your main concern — it lands at €1399.00 versus €1499.00.

Motor performance winner

Fafrees F26 Carbon M

12% higher than its rival

Value winner

Fafrees F26 Carbon M

6% better value for money

Specifications

SpecificationFafrees F26 Carbon MShengmilo S600
Price€1499.00€1399.00+7%
Rating★4.6 (640)★4.2 (520)
Overall82/100+11%74/100
Drivetrain
MotorBafang 250W achternaaf + koppelsensor250W achternaaf / 250W rear hub
Top speed25 km/h (EU-legaal / EU-legal)25 km/h (EU-legaal / EU-legal)
Battery48V 18Ah (864 Wh)48V 17.5Ah (840 Wh)
Range80-110 km+14%70-95 km
GearingShimano 8-speedShimano 9-speed+13%
Frame & tires
Weight24 kg+33%32 kg
Wheel size26 x 4.0 inch26 x 4.0 inch
FrameCarbon, niet-vouwbaar / Carbon, non-foldingAluminium, niet-vouwbaar / Aluminum, non-folding
SuspensionVoorvork / Front forkVoor + achter / Front + rear
BrakesHydraulische schijfremmen / Hydraulic discHydraulische schijfremmen / Hydraulic disc

Pros and cons

Fafrees F26 Carbon M

Pros

  • Bafang 250W rear hub motor with real torque sensor feels natural and progressive
  • Carbon frame drops weight to 24 kg — by far the lightest fatbike here
  • 48V 18Ah (864 Wh) battery delivers 80-110 km of range in Eco
  • 26 inch wheels give better rolling resistance and stability than 20 inch alternatives

Cons

  • Carbon parts are more vulnerable to crashes than aluminium
  • No folding mechanism — balcony or boot storage is harder

Shengmilo S600

Pros

  • Full front and rear suspension suits serious trail riding
  • 48V 17.5Ah (840 Wh) battery returns 70-95 km in Eco
  • 26 inch wheels with 4.0 inch tyres roll more stably than 20 inch options
  • Hydraulic disc brakes front and rear stop reliably in muddy conditions

Cons

  • No folding mechanism — storage needs a regular bike shed or rack
  • Non-folding and 32 kg makes car or train transport cumbersome

Other comparisons