You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I'm eyeing up a new bike, it's just what I want in every sense. But it has a super boost rear hub and that's annoyingly putting me off mainly due to compatibility with existing wheels and ability to transfer between bikes. But, it's sufficient a bargain to overlook it... But then I think, if it's not commonly used will it become obsolete? I know, crystal ball time and any mtb standard could change any minute. It's mostly the compatibility and transferability.
Yep sacrifice a chicken time.
It's absolute bullshit is what it is but unfortunately the few manufacturers that have stuck with it, do seem to make really good bikes. I personally wouldn't buy one ever, there's no shortage of good bikes and I hate standards bullshit with a passion, anyone using this one should be thrown in a volcano imo.
But in the end it's never going to cause you a major problem in your ownership, especially if it comes with a decent one in the first place, something you can expect to last the life of the bike. If it does become fully obsolete and I bloody hope it does, then at worst track down a good spare hub before they vanish completely when they're cheap, in case you ever need it or want to build a spare wheel. Maybe it hurts resale value.
Interesting that they're selling frames (reduced) with a free rear hub thrown in.
It's absolute bullshit is what it is
It's what Boost should have been imho. We now commonly have 55mm crank specs which just don't have a good chain line on 148 rear end, 53mm isn't great either. Plus wider hubs always make better wheels.
I've had a Salsa FS for 6 or 7 years which is superboost. You just forget about it - until you want to swap wheels between bikes (not essential) or buy new cranks/rings (SB spacing, 0mm offset etc). It's got 'Dub Wide' cranks on now - yes, another standard (153 or 155mm or something). I just use appropriate spacers on the DUB BB. Hope and DT do SB hubs, along with most others.
On my second Superboost bike now, both came with DT XM1700 wheels, they are good enough wheels and have been completely trouble free. Have to admit that they are bit heavy and upgrade would be tempting. Bargain wheels don’t really exist in SB world but many nice hubs are available in that size so custom wheels are always an option.
Looking at new bikes I am not worried about SB hubs or PF bottom brackets at all, my concerns are with geometry and suspension.
Simultaneously this...
Yep sacrifice a chicken time.
It's absolute bullshit is what it is but unfortunately the few manufacturers that have stuck with it, do seem to make really good bikes. I personally wouldn't buy one ever, there's no shortage of good bikes and I hate standards bullshit with a passion, anyone using this one should be thrown in a volcano imo.
But in the end it's never going to cause you a major problem in your ownership, especially if it comes with a decent one in the first place, something you can expect to last the life of the bike. If it does become fully obsolete and I bloody hope it does, then at worst track down a good spare hub before they vanish completely when they're cheap, in case you ever need it or want to build a spare wheel. Maybe it hurts resale value.
And this...
It's what Boost should have been imho. We now commonly have 55mm crank specs which just don't have a good chain line on 148 rear end, 53mm isn't great either. Plus wider hubs always make better wheels.
I've avoided like the plague, simply cos have always had copious spare Boost wheelsets... If I had no pre-existing bikes and or wheels running Boost, I wouldn't let it bother me though.
The only thing I would say is if you're buying a SuperBoost bike... MAKE SURE you get a decent rear hub with spares readily available for it too... I've known people with bikes out of action for hubs they were struggling to get spares for, which is unacceptable IMO.
Saracen I think…
I'm guessing Saracen - Saracen
Nice enough hubs, but you can buy a DT wheelset with them for £250 (not SB though)
Hope will have one for decades.
It's what Boost should have been imho. We now commonly have 55mm crank specs which just don't have a good chain line on 148 rear end, 53mm isn't great either. Plus wider hubs always make better wheels.
MMM somewhat agree but IMO what boost should have been is absolutely nothing at all, if we're going to play "what standard should we have" it's 142 x 12, not because it's amazing but because it was already dominant and no amount of improvement, real or otherwise, was worth the change. Boost was more bullshitty than superboost since it minimised any benefits, in the classic tweener standard nonsense of 650b etc which the bike industry loves- "enough change to make you want a new bike but not enough change to actually notice"
Old argument this of course but the "wider hubs make better wheels" is a marginal difference and what I always think is really telling, is that essentially no manufacturers made any effort to maximise flange width and height either before or after boost. If more triangulation was worth inventing a new standard for, how was it not worth putting even a tiny effort into maximising on the old standard? And why do so many wheels not maximise it now?
Anyway rant over, thankfully it's almost certainly a dying standard and will be gone soon enough at which point SRAM'll introduce 137 and tell us it's better for heel rub. But that doesn't really harm the OP
Just get a few Velosolo adaptors before they run out of stock and convert your Boost wheels. That's what I did.
@Northwind - in fact with their first bike Hope did the complete opposite and only switched to a boost because they realise if a customer broke their hub abroad they couldn’t get a quick replacement anywhere and it might ruin their holiday/trip.
MMM somewhat agree but IMO what boost should have been is absolutely nothing at all, if we're going to play "what standard should we have" it's 142 x 12, not because it's amazing but because it was already dominant and no amount of improvement, real or otherwise, was worth the change. Boost was more bullshitty than superboost since it minimised any benefits, in the classic tweener standard nonsense of 650b etc which the bike industry loves- "enough change to make you want a new bike but not enough change to actually notice"
Old argument this of course but the "wider hubs make better wheels" is a marginal difference and what I always think is really telling, is that essentially no manufacturers made any effort to maximise flange width and height either before or after boost. If more triangulation was worth inventing a new standard for, how was it not worth putting even a tiny effort into maximising on the old standard? And why do so many wheels not maximise it now?
Anyway rant over, thankfully it's almost certainly a dying standard and will be gone soon enough at which point SRAM'll introduce 137 and tell us it's better for heel rub. But that doesn't really harm the OP
And to counter this argument... 142x12, which was basically just 135QR with different end caps for a 12mm axle, was born when 26" wheels and 9spd were the dominant standards... From plenty of experience, 142x12 does not play well with 1x12spd drivetrains on an MTB (it's better on a Gravel bike cos of the lower chainring offset). But from even more experience, the spoke angle on the drive side rear (and disc side front) on non Boost 29er wheels (with rims with zero offset) makes them very weak in specific directions... Boost doesn't make a huge difference (particularly on the rear, makes more on the front), but crucially it makes "enough" difference... Would Super Boost have been better in the first place? Yes... Absolutely... But it would have required entire new drivetrain standards immediately (which wasn't going to happen, that was going to take time)... And we also shouldn't forget that many people have heel clearance issues on bikes with a 142mm back end, which is worsened on a 148mm back end so 157 would be an absolute no go for many!
Wider hubs DO make stronger wheels... Boost on the front made a significant difference (10% extra hub width was more like 20-25% extra width between flanges)... Boost on the rear made much less of a difference, but it did allow for slightly less of an angle on drive side spokes and hence more even tensions side to side, even if it didn't fully fix the problem. Larger flanges conversely, would do less than you think. You end up with a stiffer wheel, yes, but not necessarily a stronger one. In fact, in much the same way that a deeper section rim can make a wheel stiffer but also less forgiving and more prone to failure, larger flange hubs would be doing the same thing to a lesser degree too. The shorter the spoke, the stiffer the wheel will be, but also the less forgiving and the lower the elastic limit would be for the spokes...
That said... EVERYTHING is a compromise remember... We still have huge dangly derailleurs hanging off the (increasingly wider) widest part of the bike where they are incredibly vulnerable. Of course, a narrower hub helps negate this issue, but then so does getting rid of the derailleur in the first place...
TLDR...? Boost is the best compromise IMO still... Other hub widths have their plus points, but also their detractors too. Ever an industry critic, I've given the industry the benefit of the doubt on this one continually over the years and am fully invested personally in Boost as a wheel size at least for the foreseeable future.
Trek Session, Raw Yalla, jeez half the field of DH bikes run 157 wheels. Can't say it would bother me, so much so that our latest incoming purchase is an Atherton A200 which is 157 as well. I do have 4 rear wheels already though 😀
SuperBoost 157 is different to DH 157 (could this be any more confusing?!!)
I did some searching to find out the difference and it’s just the driveside flange position that changes, with SB having the flange much further outwards. The cassette and rotor still fit in the same place so the wheels should be cross-compatible but you’d need different spoke lengths if rebuilding a wheel.
This analysis is interesting:
https://www.pinkbike.com/u/redfoxrun/blog/revisiting-whippermans-wheel-strength-math.html
DH is stronger but SB is stiffer.
If the numbers are right, considering we’ve gone from 26” to 29” wheels, and to longer travel and grippier tyres, and also to e-bikes being common, it looks like we should have skipped 148 and gone straight to 157 but 148 is still better than 142.
If 32” gathers momentum in XC and super-tall world I bet they’ll all be 157 hubs.
I don't get any heel rub with SB pivot but I do with Santa Cruz Boost.
The way Pivot deals with SB heel rub.
157SB and 157DH just have different flange spacing - free hub etc is all the same.
I think it just allows the DH to have equal length spokes on DS and NDS so makes a stronger wheel.
Saracen I think…
Correct, I wasn't naming in case perceived as shaming.
But I'm holding off, and maybe they'll make the swap to Boost for next year (hopeful face).
And to counter this argument... 142x12, which was basically just 135QR with different end caps for a 12mm axle, was born when 26" wheels and 9spd were the dominant standards... From plenty of experience, 142x12 does not play well with 1x12spd drivetrains on an MTB (it's better on a Gravel bike cos of the lower chainring offset). But from even more experience, the spoke angle on the drive side rear (and disc side front) on non Boost 29er wheels (with rims with zero offset) makes them very weak in specific directions... Boost doesn't make a huge difference (particularly on the rear, makes more on the front), but crucially it makes "enough" difference...
There's nothing about 142 that "doesn't play well" with 12 speed, and there literally can't be, it's just geometry and the key parts are the same. Boost just moves it all out a little, that's the entire difference. At the very most you can have a crank/cassette clash but that's "wrong crank" not a hub standard thing and you can do that with boost too.
The only chainline/etc benefit of boost was for wider tyres, which is why that was made so much of. But then 3 inch vaniches completely and 2.6 got cleverly repackaged as "plus" so that one advantage went away.
When I was looking at the Saracens and then realised they were all Superboost, I found this:
There's nothing about 142 that "doesn't play well" with 12 speed, and there literally can't be, it's just geometry and the key parts are the same. Boost just moves it all out a little, that's the entire difference. At the very most you can have a crank/cassette clash but that's "wrong crank" not a hub standard thing and you can do that with boost too.
You've answered why there is a "doesn't play well" issue with 12spd on 142/135 back ends... Chainline!!! It's terrible in the largest cog, and not much better in the 2nd largest cog, and results in issues if not carefully managed from experience... Also, the mech cage comes dangerously close to the spokes on a 142/135 29er wheel with a 12spd setup in the largest cog, so much so that they almost touch when everything is setup correctly. Why...? Well for a start, 12spd is spaced almost the same as 11spd, but the 12th cog (or actually the first cog) sits further inboard, and you can see this in the dish of a 12spd SRAM Eagle cassette quite obviously when you hold one in your hand...
There's nothing about 142 that "doesn't play well" with 12 speed, and there literally can't be, it's just geometry and the key parts are the same. Boost just moves it all out a little, that's the entire difference. At the very most you can have a crank/cassette clash but that's "wrong crank" not a hub standard thing and you can do that with boost too.
You've answered why there is a "doesn't play well" issue with 12spd on 142/135 back ends within this response... Chainline!!! It's terrible in the largest cog, and not much better in the 2nd largest cog, and results in issues if not carefully managed from experience... Also, the mech cage comes dangerously close to the spokes on a 142/135 29er wheel with a 12spd setup in the largest cog, so much so that they almost touch when everything is setup correctly. Why...? Well for a start, 12spd is spaced almost the same as 11spd, but the 12th cog (or actually the first cog) sits further inboard, and you can see this in the dish of a 12spd SRAM Eagle cassette quite obviously when you hold one in your hand...
When I was looking at the Saracens and then realised they were all Superboost, I found this:
That's what I referred to earlier in the thread - it's what I use. Just be aware they're selling off remaining stock.
I've picked one of those up, thanks
That's the thing - while Superboost sounds like a pain, and like 148 it is totally pointless, all you need is an adapter for your existing wheels. I still run older high-end 142mm wheels in my boost frames. So I'd not let it put me off a new frame. Problemsolvers also do the Super Booster adapter that does the same job as the Velo Solo one.
I would definitely not recommend the adapters that don't require a redish though - they move the cassette to an awkward position for your chainline.
If you use centrelock hubs then you can just use a front centerlock boost adapter mount which moves the rotor our 10mm and then use a couple of 12mm spacers on the axle for the same effect.
I have purchased one of the Saracen's all I can say is it is a brilliant bike & insane value for money. Full XT on a bike less that £2,500 - insane in this day & age.
I have purchased one of the Saracen's all I can say is it is a brilliant bike & insane value for money. Full XT on a bike less that £2,500 - insane in this day & age.
Absolutely agree. I'm very happy with my current bike, but IF I was looking then the Ariel 30 at £2.5k is a steal. Not just the full XT inc 4-pots, but things like good fork and shock, the decent rims (EX511s on a 130mm travel bike, yes please), tyres, bar/stem etc. Nice all round package with little I'd want to change - probably the hubs being the only average bit of the spec.
I'd certainly not be concerned about it superboost whatsoever.
Problemsolvers also do the Super Booster adapter that does the same job as the Velo Solo one.
Velosolo one doesn't need a redish but I don't have any issues with chainline that I've noticed. Problem solvers one does need a redish though.
(EX511s on a 130mm travel bike, yes please)
Different strokes and all that, but if your 130 trail bike ends up with the same rims and tyres as your 160 bike, then it defeats the purpose somewhat
(EX511s on a 130mm travel bike, yes please)
Different strokes and all that, but if your 130 trail bike ends up with the same rims and tyres as your 160 bike, then it defeats the purpose somewhat
Actually you're right, not sure how I confused myself. It's XM421s I've got on my 140/120 trail bike and EX511/EX471 combo on the G1. Not sure what I was thinking! Still nice to see proper DT rims on a bike at that price, even if they're OTT.