SOC15: Industry Nine expands Boost 148 and 15×110 hub options

Man I really noticed this on my stiff as get out I9 wheels. THey just weren’t stiff enough! Wait, they were awesome. Literally the only bad part was my crap Yeti frame that died an early death. New bikes were all 650b so I’m stuck with that.

I love the boost concept of wider flanges make for much more laterally stiffer wheels. But I hate that one you have to buy a new fork or frame to get there.

P

cracks me up: a massive increase in stiffness of 35%. What exactly does that mean? That older hubs where 35% less stiff than necessary? That new hubs cannot be bent by a machine unlees you apply 200 tons of torsional strength … what does that mean, really!!!

Great, stiffer wheels mixed with now wider flexy frames and fork which now makes zero difference in the end for stiffness, but does add weight. All in the name of innovation!

Honest question… could hub makers create adaptors to let their current hubs fit the new Boost Standards? (For example, how many 135mm hubs can be flipped to 142 with the right end caps?)

I’m betting no, due to rotor spacing/cassette spacing (and of course $ reasons) but would love to know. I don’t know that I have “Standards Hate” but I do know that if I can’t upgrade my awesome hubs I have now to new standards when I eventually upgrade/kill my Epic… I’ll be looking first in frame that can still run 142mm (and hope my 1 year Pike lasts me a long time!)

All this from a 6’3″, 200ish guy who doesn’t jump, but rides pretty hard and has nothing to complain stiffness wise about from his wheels right now.

The bike industry should stop using the word Standard because it sure seems like there isn’t one. Ha! I agree with Boom, nobody needs to buy any of the new stuff. For the most part all new stuff are better than what was available to us 10 or so yrs ago.

I’ve been mountain biking since 1989 so have been around to follow a lot of the development of the sport. It seems we are in a period right now of some very rapid innovation. To keep this in perspective, look at the timeline of motorcycle development. In the first few decades there was a lot of change, and while there still is, it’s not like what it was 50 or 80 years ago. So, while bicycles have been a round for a long time, mountain bike have not.

Over the next 5 years we might see this rate of current change slow down. After-all 26″ wheels were chosen by default due to the availability of what was produced at the time for another type of bicycle. 100mm hubs were taken from road bikes, 135mm only developed from road bike rear spacing (130mm) and road rear spacing only developed from fixed gear frame spacing. Same with 25.4mm bar diameter. I look at it like the industry is breaking free from old standards that were never developed for mountain bikes anyway, at least not developed from a clean slate. What is interesting though is that many of these new standards were at some time or another introduced to the industry but we didn’t have the collective technology to make use of it. Tom Ritchey prototyped 27.5″ wheels, in 1993 Dave Weins tested a 29er (well 700 x 40c) Diamond Back at the Cactus cup, Doug Bradbury of Manitou was making wider spaced hubs (145mm and 110mm I think?) in the late 1980’s, Brent Foes showed a long travel trail bike what 20 years ago? Haro had some bikes with larger bar diameter in 1991. The original Fat Chance Yo Eddy in 1990 was promoted with Specialized 2.5″ tires. Mountain bike rims in the mid 1980’s were wide, often 30mm or slightly more, but due to the popularity of cross country racing and the demand for light weight, Keith Bontrager prototyped narrow road rim width which became widely used for over 15 years.

I guess we all have four options:
1) Buy an old fully rigid bike and ride it and enjoy it for what it is, then when it breaks down just buy another old bike for $200. (I do this)
2) Buy a current bike and be in a dream world that will last 20 years and fret about not being
able to get spare parts
3) Buy a current bike, ride it for 3-5 years until it is reasonably worn out and then sell it
and get another one, and just accept that each new bike may have different standards (I do this also)
4) Take up a sport that is not advancing technologically (running, bowling, walking, darts)

Boom – you’re drinking the kool-aid if you believe that everything new is somehow better. “Better” based on what metric? What the marketing department says? What the magazines say? You call steel and rigid bikes obsolete, I can’t even take you seriously.