I just want to hear it. Let the hate flow. I know it's 2.14% stiffer, I don't care, I want people to shit on it.
What's wrong with Boost?
- Thread starter Sandwich
- Start date
It is not compatible with any of the other standards they throw down our throats.
If my hub will easily convert I am in favor of it for the same reasons I am in favor of the 157 standard for DH. (the whole slots in the frame helping to keep the wheel aligned and not relying 100% on the axle part)
If current parts can be "updated" with out having to start 100% fresh, then I don't mind. the $20 it cost me to upgrade my hope evo II from 150-157 didn't make me sad.
But if I have to buy a whole new hub after building a wheelset, that makes me sad.
If my hub will easily convert I am in favor of it for the same reasons I am in favor of the 157 standard for DH. (the whole slots in the frame helping to keep the wheel aligned and not relying 100% on the axle part)
If current parts can be "updated" with out having to start 100% fresh, then I don't mind. the $20 it cost me to upgrade my hope evo II from 150-157 didn't make me sad.
But if I have to buy a whole new hub after building a wheelset, that makes me sad.
I think it's mostly frustrating that they couldn't engineer their way into using an existing standard.
I'd be curious to know the percentage of people that actually swap frames these days. I used to constantly, but I think in our age of incompatibility that it usually just makes sense for me to sell the complete and buy another complete.
Last edited:
That travelling with bikes is already a pain and then they want to make the damn things wider...
the problem with boost 148 is less of what it is, but what it represents - a new "standard" that's anything but. so far the only ones on board are trek / sram? that isn't a standard, that's proprietary.
i'm officially coining the term "standard fatigue". between hubs (5+ now?), bottom brackets (4 or 5), chainrings (at least 7), head tubes/headsets (haven't even counted), it's fucking absurd.
i'm officially coining the term "standard fatigue". between hubs (5+ now?), bottom brackets (4 or 5), chainrings (at least 7), head tubes/headsets (haven't even counted), it's fucking absurd.
just a point of clarity here - was the 142 hub standard actualy wider flanges on the shell? or just a few extra mm on the axle sleeve to compensate for the slots/grooves on the dropouts?
The latter.
148mm vs the tried and true 150mm...
148mm vs 150mm..
2mm....
ONE FUCKING MILLIMETER ON EACH SIDE
148mm vs 150mm..
2mm....
ONE FUCKING MILLIMETER ON EACH SIDE
simple. 150mm hub + dremel/anglegrinder/file/hacksaw/sawzall - 2mm = 148mm hubs.
at least the Industry Illuminati™ seem to be pretty cool with maintaining the 12mm rear axle diameter.....
....for now
....for now
you just had to mention 12mm out loud didn't you...thanks...
I'm probably saying too much, but I heard they're going to move to a CS-20 mm rear axle and CS-12 mm front axle.at least the Industry Illuminati™ seem to be pretty cool with maintaining the 12mm rear axle diameter.....
....for now
* CS = custom standard
Umm you realize it's not just a a few mm on each side that changed right?
http://www.bikerumor.com/2014/12/19/2016-axle-standards-part-1-rear-148mm-thru-axle-coming-fast-its-about-more-than-just-better-wheels/
Actually had to search to find out what the fuck BOOST even is.
Google threw up this little gem... "According to stats from the manufacturers, a 29″ rear wheel with a 148mm hub has the same stiffness as a 27.5″ wheel with a 142mm hub"
Sounds flexy
Google threw up this little gem... "According to stats from the manufacturers, a 29″ rear wheel with a 148mm hub has the same stiffness as a 27.5″ wheel with a 142mm hub"
Sounds flexy
Yeah. For the last time, 150 vs. 148 is NOT a fair comparison. 150 has wide flanges but no axle extension allowing it to locate into the frame. Take flange spacing of 150, add in axle extensions, and get 157mm spacing. Take 'normal' flange spacing, add axle extensions, get 142mm spacing. 148 is halfway between 142 and 157.
That said, it's still downright insulting that the bike industry decided we need it. They're telling us bigger wheels need more stiffness. Fine. You had a perfectly good 36 spoke standard that would fit in any frame currently on the market, not require a whole new q-factor and crank spec, and yet you did... this.
I'm not sure which is worse. The fact that bike industry 'engineers' are so stupid, or the fact they think we are...
That said, it's still downright insulting that the bike industry decided we need it. They're telling us bigger wheels need more stiffness. Fine. You had a perfectly good 36 spoke standard that would fit in any frame currently on the market, not require a whole new q-factor and crank spec, and yet you did... this.
I'm not sure which is worse. The fact that bike industry 'engineers' are so stupid, or the fact they think we are...
and the whole goal was to make the wheels as stiff as 26".
they clearly forgot another option to wider flanges and wider hubs is taller flanges.
Nothing wrong with it, but I don;t get why they don't just make bikes 150mm out back, all of them, and get it over and done with. The reason for the spacing out back has something to do with single ring set ups right?
Now that we're all going 1x on all bikes, would a universal 150mm not be best? I'm no bike designer, so might be talking complete shyte.
Now that we're all going 1x on all bikes, would a universal 150mm not be best? I'm no bike designer, so might be talking complete shyte.
I know less than fuck-all about lots of things, but extra less about wheel design. So with that in mind, I took it as basically a way to try to make wagon wheels stiffer (even if the average gay dentist can't/won't notice) and also a way for frame manus to design around the new Cracker Barrel tires and rims (fat fuck and almost fat fuck tires). I give no poops about either, as I'm going to pinkbike-luddite it as long as they still have 26" tires available and/or I don't don't go full gay and start hunting lions after receiving my DDS.
this^all this effort on tweaking out drivetrains, and no one is working on a gearbox.
next bike....G2.5
Are you asking for a new drivetrain standard?all this effort on tweaking out drivetrains, and no one is working on a gearbox.
I thought someone had a gearbox, belt drive bike at MSA this past weekend. German bike maybe?
possibly. pinion is popular over in europa
Easy there buddy, I just bought a new DDS-2000 Hunting Drone. So now I can obliterate all sorts of "dangerous" animals from the comfort of my leather bound book library. I double dare you to wear a zebra print TLD kit.
http://www.effigear.com/#!copie-de-accueil/c1jv8all this effort on tweaking out drivetrains, and no one is working on a gearbox.
http://pinion.eu/en/
http://www.srsuntour-cycling.com/bike/v-boxx/V-BOXX-GB10-VB-FR9-BAZ-4558.html
JUST WAIT!!!!all this effort on tweaking out drivetrains, and no one is working on a gearbox.
two weeks?!?!
Should have clarified, none of the major companies
12 weeks...
You buy it, and I'll wear that shit! hahaEasy there buddy, I just bought a new DDS-2000 Hunting Drone. So now I can obliterate all sorts of "dangerous" animals from the comfort of my leather bound book library. I double dare you to wear a zebra print TLD kit.
I do switch parts occasionally between bikes, when something fails and you don't have a backup.
Exhibit A - Moto wheels: the aftermarket manufacturers of wheels will often have ONE SINGLE HUB SHELL that they'll use for the front, and another single they will use for the rear.
IT WILL FIT ALL MANUFACTURERS FRAMES/FORKS WITH ADAPTERS FOR AXLE/ROTORS/SPROCKET.
Imagine that?!? One goddamn wheelset. Modular. Fits all applications. No farting around trying to match up hubs to frames and forks, with the exception of the cast OEM hubs.
Exhibit B - Mountain bike wheels: Take the above description. Apply the inverse. Why? Because them bicycle engineers DEFINITELY know what they're doing, no matter what anyone says. They are their own breed. Unique, irreplaceable and with infinite vision of what the market needs, even if it doesn't ever realize it. Efficiency, top to bottom. Explicitly obvious in every product.
Which is why they are paid below market wages. Nothing but the best will do!