UN-Boost Your Bike with D.Fender’s Spacer Kit for 142mm Rear Hubs in 148mm Frames

Cyclists are the only people I know that buy BMWs only to install those plastic spinner rims one gets at Kragen/O’Reilly’s.

As a bike mechanic I was bummed about backward compatibility on most frames. This solves the problem of getting rid of my beloved Chris King hub, or having to wait and order another one in the future once they actually see the light of day. The Salsa Cycles Deadwood is too good of a bike to sit and wait to be built so I decided to do something about it. And like all of our products these are Made In The USA

Way to stick it to the man!

You can buy washers at home depot to hack your bike together. No need for a special product.

JBikes-

While most people are probably OK with the retrofit (it would be cheap to find out), other things might cause problems. If you’re running a large chain ring, bringing it inboard 3mm might cause chainstay interference, for instance. Bottom line is, 3mm isn’t much but at the extremes it will make a difference.

My take on boost is that people are paying for more tire clearance, shorter chain stays, more travel, and stiffer wheels so the industry accommodates. For people buying a complete bike, it is a selling point. Gotta start somewhere. It would be weird if technology stopped changing and nothing became obsolete anymore.

why the hell 148 instead of 150 was always BS

@JMUSuspension.
I know they do, but they aren’t offering axles to retro 142 to to the 148. I asked, I called, I begged, they said no. And for the 8$ VS the cost of a new King hub I think the difference is pretty good. I already had the wheels, etc, just transferred them from my Krampus to my Deadwood.

Begin my first rant of 2016

What s@!#s me to tear is when I hear people say thing like ‘oh this has been engineered to be better, so it must be… bla bla bla…’. As @pete so kindly pointed out, 150 already existed. It was THERE, did what this Boost tosh says it does, without having to do it again and has been doijg it for a few years already. And 148 vs. 150… that’s 2mm folks. 2… TWO. Not sure how big a dif that is? Get out your Verniers and look, then think that’s 1mm per side.

148 was absolute pure ‘Merketingerering’, that’s it.

@JMUSuperman, no, they did not see the light, they saw a market segment they could not afford to neglect – they make hubs and 148 is a new hub. As has been said, Boost now coming on new bikes means that there will be upgrades etc. etc hence a 148 ecosystem will emerge, and that ecosystem will need ‘support’. King not offering it would have been daft, though all good modern aftermarket hubs should have the ability to be swapped back and forth with adaptors.

I like what @DFENDER is doing, it is sticking it to ‘the man’ and keeps perfectly good frames running for as long as they should, not as long as the marketing man thinks they should.

End my first rant of 2016

check it out:

http://www.bikeradar.com/us/gear/article/trail-tech-five-technologies-to-look-for-in-2016-45948/

Booste could be replaced as soon as 2016. Enjoy your new boost 650b bikes suckers! You’ll all own outdated stuff like me very soon!

Bikerumor, you seem pretty behind on this one. Adapter kits have been made for a couple of months now and we’ve been talking about this since Sept. on mtbr

http://forums.mtbr.com/wheels-tires/boost-148-adapters-989869.html

I applaud dfender for helping out with a solution but his is very limited to what’s already available. It’s just the 2 spacers. Others provide a solution for the disc rotor as well with their kits. And one offers custom made end caps so you don’t have to worry about losing spacers.

this solution is far away from being “rock solid”. its just a question of time that this solution will damage your axle. it’s impossible, that the surface pressure is always high enough & dfender is not able to guarantee it for all possible combinations 😉
a “rock solid” solution will be to have by 3mm extended endcaps for the hub. this can make every cutting machine operator for a cup of coffee.

@Antipodean_eleven, @D.FENDER

I’m not defending Boost 148 but it should be noted that it is no where close to ‘150/83’.

150 (as used on DH bikes) is the same nomenclature as 135mm rear spacing (ie it is 15mm wider). 142mm is just the thru axle version of 135mm (ie they have the same cassette and chainline spacing.

Boost 148 is 6mm wider (3mm wider cassette and chainline) than this 135/142 spacing but still 9mm narrower than a 150 DH bike.

@Veganpotter, 150mm hubs don’t have the 3.5mm shoulder extension on either end like a 142 or 148 hub. Since they don’t have this extension, the cassette lockring would interfere with the frame.

BTW this is the Jon who was talking about 148 v 150 not the other two posts.

@other Jon

This solution puts all the shear load through the axle rather than both the end cap and the axle. That means a weaker system and a pretty dangerous failure mode.

Mondraker are ahead of the game, they use 157mm spacing on their plus size bikes. Yahoo its already out there as its the sae as downhill hubs. http://www.slam69.co.uk/2016-mondraker-crafty-r-275-16106-p.asp

Thanks for the positivity. To the negatives I just lol.

As far as disc spacers etc. Those are coming, but the cost of getting them produced in the USA, is higher, and thus (since I am a one man show, with limited funds) will be coming sometime after the new year. I have quite the backlog of products that between various proto stages. I also have something pretty special showing up at QBPs FROSTBIKE this year.

The tolerances are pretty tight on the piece but since every manufacturer is different and we based this off of a King axle the fit could be different. As far as testing goes. We haven’t seen any roll marks. These spacers are held in place with the clamping force of the axle. The only way to a get a roll mark would be to ride a bike with loose axle. Even then, alloy on alloy isn’t that much of an issue.

Irregardless we reccomend that these be installed by a competent and professional bicycle shop to check on initial installation.

Endcaps are only the solution on a per hub basis. However if you use a hub (i.e. King). That uses a one piece axle then end caps cannot be made for them.

@xc-fr

I’m still not seeing it. Not saying you’re wrong by any means, just that I don’t see the issue.

150 hubs don’t slot into a dropout. They’re just held in place by the clamping force. In fact if you read about it one of the reasons they went to 157mm was it made the wheel easier to instal as you didn’t need to hold it in place.

No question the dropouts make it easier to install wheels but I’m not sure how much security they add. If an axle gives way the wheel is going to come out just as it would without a dropout.

So bottom line is I’m not sure what difference there is between a spacer (that’s been properly machined to spec) and a new, lengthened end cap. The spacer can be a pain to install for sure. But as long as the end result is 148mm and the axle is adequately tensioned, the wheel should be as secure both ways, IMO.

Anyway, I have no idea the answer. But it’s an interesting argument here.

Whoooooooooooowwwwwwiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiirrrrrddddd!!!!!!!!!!!