[Closed] Is the 142mm standard dead? Will everything be Boost soon?

No, plenty of 2017 stuff still 142, mainly 27.5 wheels or XC bikes, or more importantly (given its the biggest growing area for through axles) road bikes.

I'm still on 135 on all my bikes!

Can't see any of my frames changing 😉

I predict Boost- and BoostHex

They will be lighter than boost, with just as much 'trail comes alive-ness' and n+1 stiffness.

It won't be dead until I buy my next expensive bike. It was me killed 26", that's all it takes is me spending 3k

mmmm.... Boost..

[img] [/img]

Boost Hubs, Boost Bottom Brackets, Boost Forks... Isn't there a 150mm & 157mm spacing too?

Too many types!!

Isn't there a 150mm & 157mm spacing too?

Too many types!!

DH bikes, 157 is a 150mm hub which have been around for at least 15 years with similar end caps to a 142mm hub.

The 3 criteria for making a standard in cycling obsolete:

1) It works perfectly
2) It'll be expensive to replace
3) It's becoming universally accepted outside of budget bikes.

So yep, 142 is doomed.

It's amazing my 142 hubs also do 135 qr and bolt through, can work with 148 a day the front ones do qr, 15 & 20mm. Amazes me how good well thought out engineering works.

I'm planning on keeping my 135 until whatever obsoletes Boost is released, thus avoiding two obsolescence cycles. By that point 26 might be back in fashion too.

Just wait until the bike industry find out about boost mini

[img] [/img]

Edit: On a more serious note, its a complete PITA, and can't understand why the manufacturers can't see its costing them sales.
I've got 5 bikes right now, and none of the wheels are compatible with each other....
Cant see me spending money on anything more than a winter beater bike until they get it sorted out.

It's amazing my 142 hubs also do 135 qr and bolt through, can work with 148

But if your hubs are adaptable then you are losing out on all the supposed benefits of Boosting your life 😉 🙂

Am very keen to get that chocolate bar and put a measuring tape on it. I reckon it'd be around 142mm

stiffness of boost just isn't required with wider rims coming out these days, I just ordered a 2017 bike, and 142 rear hub was in its favour over some other potential candidates, other pluses were thread in bb and space for a water bottle, simple things that ruled out some other bikes for me.

For previous bike purchases, standards were never really an issue, but I now have some pretty nice carbon weheels and they are moving onto the next bike so it had to be compatible, previous average wheels would have just been moved on.

It is a problem if new frames go over to the latest standard and you want to swap over perfectly servicable parts from an existing frame. It is what has put me off looking at the new cotic Rocket Max. I've got a potential donor bike but I can't justify buying yet another set of wheels and a fork, or even just a rear wheel.

See the thing for me is, I understood (was bought into) the whole wheel size changes. It just made sense, but boost doesn't do it for me. Sure I ordered a boost bike (which I have just cancelled the order for) but the fact all my other kit which is barely a year old now won't fit a new frame makes my ting kind boggle. I was all for a new frame this year and would of been all over the new five. But it will have to wait for me now. I am just not willing to chuck more cash at something else only for it to me made old Skool in 10 months. I'm all for tangible progress, but boost to me is a step too far. Understand the science behind it though...also understand the need for new standards to help push sales

It is better though ....

[I]I've got 5 bikes right now, and none of the wheels are compatible with each other....
Cant see me spending money on anything more than a winter beater bike until they get it sorted out. [/I]

So let me get this right, you've bought 5 bikes and they've all got different wheel specifications - you did this on purpose, right... 🙄

Well yes and no.
Each was the right bike at the right time, but certainly isn't very handy for donor parts.

Bought in the following order:
Road bike with rim brakes (road disks weren't a thing yet)
29er hardtail (135 rear, 15QR front) (142 wasn't a thing yet)
27.5 FS (142 rear, 15QR front)
CX bike with disks (135 rear, 9mm front)(this rear would technically fit 29er, but not too useful)
650b+ rigid SS (135 rear, 9mm front)(front from CX would fit, but again not useful)

So yeah, very happy with each bike, but wtf @ wheel compatibility. Will certainly have to pay more attention to that in the future.

It's only a problem if you're constantly buying new "upgrades". Most people I know, buy or build a bike and ride it until it falls apart or they sell it to put towards a new one.

The thing that really narks me about boost, is all the companies who til now clearly couldn't give a flying **** about wheel stiffness, who sold all sorts of random badly built rubbish, suddenly declaring it to be a good reason to buy a new bike. Looking in particular at Orange here, it was depressingly predictable with them but just about everyone's guilty of it. We could have had taller flanges, stiffer rims, better builds in general but nobody ever bothered til it was marketable. And a good chunk of Boost bikes will still have shitey wheels in them, same as lots of bikes that got maxle upgrades still had flexy pivots or mainframes or swingarms, or lots of long travel bikes with tapered headtubes still come with 32mm forks.

clubby - Member

It's only a problem if you're constantly buying new "upgrades". Most people I know, buy or build a bike and ride it until it falls apart or they sell it to put towards a new one.

...at which point, it's a problem because their old bike's been devalued.

[quote=fifeandy ]Well yes and no.
Each was the right bike at the right time, but certainly isn't very handy for donor parts.
(front from CX would fit, but again not useful)

ISTM the issue with your stable isn't so much changing wheel standards, but that they all have diverse purposes and other stuff. Not being able to fit the road bike front wheel in the CX bike isn't a wheel standards issue for example. If all the hub standards were the same on those bikes, then which wheels would you want to swap between bikes?

...at which point, it's a problem because their old bike's been devalued.

I find it's the falling apart thing that contributes most to any depreciation...