Have we done this yet?

Another brand (Knolly) using 157 rather than 148 OLD rear hubs on non-DH bikes.

Should we have jumped straight to this from 142 in the first place?

No, can’t say I’d notice the difference though in stiffness between a 142 and 148..But given that 148 boost has it’s issues with tyre size I can see where Noel is going with the 157. Whether it sticks remains to be seen.

I do own a Knolly 26″ so maybe a bit biased here! 🙂 From the Knolly forum elsewhere a lot of people are still looking to buy the ‘Fugitive’ and the 157 std hasn’t seemed to deter them.

I’ve not had any stiffness problems with a 135 Maxle rear axle.

Yes

Yes. Banshee were offering the choice of 135, 142 and 150 dropouts on their KS-link bikes until boost came along.

Stupid idea. Won’t catch on.

Though we did it with an 83mm BB because that properly sorts the heel clearance problem.

So… Shimano are joining the party…

tuskaloosa

Subscriber

No, can’t say I’d notice the difference though in stiffness between a 142 and 148..But given that 148 boost has it’s issues with tyre size

I know this is a seriously old thread, but, what issues? I happily had a 3.0 in my trek remedy 29 and it’s a 73/142.

Can we jump to what comes after super boost or should we all just get bikes on subscription. Then give them back when they are out of date.

Are we all going to end up walking like cowboys?

Are we all going to end up walking like cowboys?

When I run or walk my feet are further apart than when they are on the pedals of any bike. Even a fat bike has a narrower foot placement than a typically running stance.