[Closed] Boost. Or not to boost ....

Boost.

It's the way of the future.

Boost, you say....?!
Most definitely yes!

[Img] [/Img]

Boost, OE has gone boost which pretty much curtains for non-boost.

Or wait till next year for BoostMax™

I'm going to wait for BoostMinus

If 2018 is boostmax, 2019 is boostlite...

Go one the, what is boost going to do for me?
And do I need a new front hub ( as this will only affect the front), or a new wheel ...
Someone has said you can get spacers and re-dish the wheel. But how will the spacing for disc brakes work???

Go one the, what is boost going to do for me?

Nothing other than keep you up to date before your second hand kit loses all its value.

Go one the, what is boost going to do for me

Nothing. It'll just mean you can buy another pair of pikes as they aren't making non boost any more. Or possibly if you need to warranty them in 18 months.

Of course irrelevant when boost max, minus, and 26 & 7/8ths" render boost obsolete in 2 years...

Re warranty .... are Pikes "challenging"?

Non boost and coil it if you are going for a pike.

Boost is an over marketed, incremental gain in wheel strength acheived by making hub flange spacing wider, thus improving the spoke angle against side forces.

I'd only go to boost on a new frame or fork. Certainly not worth it just to have it.

Someone has said you can get spacers

Hope make kits to make your 100mm hub boost 110. Brake side stays where it is, drive side is 10mm wider cap and you need to dish the wheel to compensate. Small bonus is a more even triangle for your spokes but it's a pretty marginal benefit, the bigger benefit is not buying a new hub yet but still having boost forks that may or may not be more future proof

Oh yeah, if the fork takes torque caps make sure to get the right Hope adapter kit, it will improve your life 😀

What about at the rear? I'm looking at discounted 2017 Transition frames that are all 142.... I presume they will be boosted for 2018

poah - Member
Non boost and coil it if you are going for a pike

Pretty rough to butcher a new fork like that but I agree about the coil if it's a 2017 or earlier Pike. CRC had good deals on Lyriks (better air spring) especially if you have a BC discount

Non boost and coil it if you are going for a pike.

Coil. Hmmm...

I'd love to do a blind test on the coil shouters, to see if they actually can tell the difference.

I have an air sprung and a coil Pike so pop around if you want to feel the difference. Blind testing MTBs is hazardous though 😀

I'm no suspension expert but I'm very confident I'd know which was which by feel alone, it is quite distinct

I went for a mattoc with the IRT chamber. Been better than the pike I had with a luftkappe. Had the pike not had bushing issues I would have coiled it

Boost? Wait for 'Yorkie Man Sized'.

Boost can F right off. 150mm so you could whack in a set of dh wheels for an uplift day? Nah lets make it 148mm.

I've just acquired both boost and non boost forks.

One came with a new bike, one (cheap rigid forks tbf) came for an existing bike. Buy what suits best and with one eye on possible/probable redundancy and how long you expect to be using the parts in question.

I went boost with the new bike not because it was the future, but because thats what the bike from the model range that allowed the options I wanted (27.5/27.5+/29er) came with, apparently the 29er version I was looking at couldn't do 27.5+.

So long as I get 3 to 5 years use out of the platform I'm fine with it. And I'm yet to struggle finding a bog [i]standard[/i] old school QR rear hub.

It really doesn't matter one bit. Just got for the fork that you can get the best deal on. If it is a boost fork then use the spacer kit or the front wheel boostinator kit. Simple.

Rubber_Buccaneer - Member 
Hope make kits to make your 100mm hub boost 110. Brake side stays where it is, drive side is 10mm wider cap and you need to dish the wheel to compensate.

MRP do a kit that doesn't need dishing. Provides an adapter to push the disc out and longer end caps. Designed for DT Swiss though and 6 bolt hubs. https://www.pinkbike.com/news/mrp-boost-adapter-kit-for-dt-swiss-wheels.html

Is the fork going to stay with the bike or move on to your next build?

I went non-boost on my hardtail as I want the trails to come alive.

Hope make kits to make your 100mm hub boost 110. Brake side stays where it is, drive side is 10mm wider cap and you need to dish the wheel to compensate. Small bonus is a more even triangle for your spokes but it's a pretty marginal benefit, the bigger benefit is not buying a new hub yet but still having boost forks that may or may not be more future proof

That's a crap solution, why not simply space either end +5mm and space the rotor outboard? No need to go re-dishing/rebuilding wheels...

TBH if I was in the position to choose right now, I would buy a boost fork and worry about adapting or replacing the hub/wheel as a matter of "future proofing".

But if you've no pressing need to be bang up to date, and would rather save a few quid now I can't imagine 15x100mm hubs vanishing from the shops overnight, plus aftermarket boost hubs still seem a little thin on the ground and slightly pricier...

The tactic is more to push boost forks into the OE market and make the customers follow along...

What about at the rear? I'm looking at discounted 2017 Transition frames that are all 142.... I presume they will be boosted for 2018

This is another good point, I am in a similar position, trying to choose between possible 142mm 29er frames or 148mm 27+/29" compatible.
For now I am choosing to put the hub standards to one side and compare frames on their other attributes... But it's hard to say longer term if "boost" will become the dominant industry standard for most MTB frames or if 142mm will be retained and used as another sub division of the market...

That's a crap solution, why not simply space either end +5mm and space the rotor outboard? No need to go re-dishing/rebuilding wheels...

I prefer re-dishing rather than spacing out the rotor, personal preference I suppose. Helps that I have a wheel jig etc

But it's hard to say longer term if "boost" will become the dominant industry standard for most MTB frames or if 142mm will be retained and used as another sub division of the market...

There's no industry standard, just the next standard to obsolete what you've got. Without this the industry would probably die as there's nothing new to sell. Not that I like changing standards.

Still, retrobiking is very much a thing and old stuff can still be found long after they are supposedly dead. Hence I'm keeping my 26ers going along with 27.5. Not got boost yet and have zero intention to as it offers no benefit whatsoever for me. I'll end up with it though due to new frame designs, much as I ended up with a 27.5 (though the wheel size offers little to me, but the geometry and long wheel base does make a big difference).

Boost can F right off. 150mm so you could whack in a set of dh wheels for an uplift day? Nah lets make it 148mm.

It would need to be 157 for that to work. All your discs and gears n stuff would be in the wrong place.

But it's hard to say longer term if "boost" will become the dominant industry standard for most MTB frames or if 142mm will be retained and used as another sub division of the market...

Boost is definitely already the dominant standard.

If I want to use the hub I have, use a 10 mm space on the none disc side and then re dish wheel? Or two 5 mm spacers each side and shim out the disc brake rotor ?

On a hope your best option is to get the 110 adaptor Torque caps - then re-dish the wheel.

Boost is definitely already the dominant standard.

Really?

I was under the impression it's more prevalent on newer high price point bikes still...

TBH I had envisaged it being used to differentiate either between "higher" and "lower" spec bikes or to help separate the more XC/marathon type bikes from Gnarr/plus/DH types down the line...

Anything that prevents parts being migrated between bikes easily and therefore deters the upgraders and self-builders helps drive new bike sales...

Well of course there's still 135 QR, and by numbers thats always going to be the main standard, but if you're talking bolt through, I doubt you'll find that many 142 bikes on sale beyond 2018.

2017 boost vs 2018 non boost ...
What is best ?

Theres no such thing as 2018 Non boost pikes... so what fork?

Okay ... goes off to check Crc ...

I re dished a Hope/flow wheel to fit my new boost forks, it's pretty easy and can be done with the wheel fitted to the fork so you don't need any extra kit apart from a spoke key. I followed some instructions I found online, take your time and be methodical about it.

Okay ... goes off to check Crc ...

Beware, CRC have Pikes labeled as 2018 that are not. Think it even gets a mention in the questions.

In a fight off between 2018 and 2017 forks, I would say you'd be wanting to save at least £100 on the 2017 forks over 2018 before its even worth considering, the inconvenience of boost if you have non-boost wheels aside.

Thanks ... that clears that up

Can any ordinary person tell the difference between boost and regular?

Me.

I can't run a 3" rear tyre on a 2x gear system without it.

Can any ordinary person tell the difference between boost and regular?

No. At least not when comparing like for like tyres. I can honestly say that boost is offering not a lot, with the exception of providing extra tyre clearance. It does marginally improve your wheels, but realistically are you likely to be the 1 in 1000 person that doesn't taco their wheel due to the small improvement in strength boost offers over non boost? Probably not. But remember its only 3mm of extra tyre clearance, so that in itself isn't exactly awesome. Its not delivering your 3" tyre clearance on a 2x drivetrain. Boost only made a 4% difference in that equation. That's delivered by the availability of 3" tyres and the person designing the bike making it work with them. 1x specific bikes offer far more of the [i]real advantages[/i] touted about boost than boost itself. However as a british bike co. we'll take that 3mm on our FS bikes to improve drive side mud clearance! It all adds up.

All that said, its not a bad thing. Its basically just someone asking how big can we go before things like heel rub get too annoying. 148 (for whatever reason) was the number settled on, and so that became boost. It actually makes sense in many engineering ways in relation to being able to widen pivots etc., just not many that really correlate to the marketing nonsense.

However as a british bike co. we'll take that 3mm on our FS bikes to improve drive side mud clearance! It all adds up.

All that said, its not a bad thing. Its basically just someone asking how big can we go before things like heel rub get too annoying. 148 (for whatever reason) was the number settled on, and so that became boost. It actually makes sense in many engineering ways in relation to being able to widen pivots etc.

And for the "bog standard" HT?

A widened rear axle and broader pivot arrangements might benefit a pricey FS bike, but all that extra 6mm means for a HT is a new rear hub is required...

For those of us luddites not seeking plus tyre clearance all we're really being lumbered with by the marketeers is additional cost and reduced heel clearance.

I'm still far from convinced most HTs ever needed a bolt through axle rather than a 135mm QR but nevertheless 12x142mm became a defacto standard only a handful of years ago and it's OK for the job... Now it's "obsolete".

I get the "incremental changes leading to accumulated benefits" over time arguments, but really boost is a forced incompatibility change purely so the bigger manufacturers can maintain turnover by making it less of a ballache to just buy a whole new bike every couple of years.

Let's not pretend the mechanical benefit is what really drives such choices, If Trek/specialized/giant give it the nod and it helps their sales it's going to happen...

benpinnick - Member

I can honestly say that boost is offering not a lot, with the exception of providing extra tyre clearance.

And even that is more or less coincidental- axle width doesn't dictate tyre clearance, a non-boost fork can offer exactly the same clearance just by broadening its stance or even in a lot of cases just improving the arch design.

If you accept the fact that Boost has benefits in some cases - and no disadvantage in the rest - then it makes sense to change everything to the one standard. It reduces manufacturing costs, stocking cost, testing cost and means your shop and distributor have fewer options competing for shelf space.

And for the "bog standard" HT?

A widened rear axle and broader pivot arrangements might benefit a pricey FS bike, but all that extra 6mm means for a HT is a new rear hub is required...

For those of us luddites not seeking plus tyre clearance all we're really being lumbered with by the marketeers is additional cost and reduced heel clearance.

I'm still far from convinced most HTs ever needed a bolt through axle rather than a 135mm QR but nevertheless 12x142mm became a defacto standard only a handful of years ago and it's OK for the job... Now it's "obsolete".

For me, cross-compatibility is a factor in the decisions made on HTs. It's a toss up between compatibility with your other or current FS bike or your older / other posher / spare wheelset, and the perception of future-proofing. tbh it can depend on what you make bikes for, your customers or brand position etc - I think backward compatibility is under-rated and jumping on new stuff asap is an easier but not 'always right for all' decision. For 2018 onwards the balance is tipping towards boost spec but I'd also agree that it's not needed, just helps add a bit of tyre space and wheel compatibility with more new bikes. It's self-fulfilling really - herd-speccing (not meant as a criticism, just how it is).
Obselete is a scare term though as you'll be able to get 135 or 142 rear hubs for years yet. Maybe not wheelsets, but there's another good reason for std wheel builds.

And even that is more or less coincidental- axle width doesn't dictate tyre clearance, a non-boost fork can offer exactly the same clearance just by broadening its stance or even in a lot of cases just improving the arch design.

I should have been more clear. Boost offers 3mm extra tyre clearance on the rear drive side. Nothing else unless you're really determined to make the biggest tyre you can fit into your fork, then you [i]might[/i] want that extra 10mm, but up to now, it is the arch design that has been the constraint as you say.

I'm going non boost for new fork to match rear of frame and my other two bikes.

All three will take the same wheels. Unprecedented since the days of 26in and qr.

scotroutes - Member 
If you accept the fact that Boost has benefits in some cases - and no disadvantage in the rest - then it makes sense to change everything to the one standard. It reduces manufacturing costs, stocking cost, testing cost and means your shop and distributor have fewer options competing for shelf space.

Until everyone then has that standard and perfectly good bike and they need a new reason to sell new stuff. Then we get Boost Plus 😀 (probably 152, just to ensure it's not DH wheel compatible again 😉 ).

Though probably not as it is pushing it to unpractical levels. Instead, introduce another new standard for something else. What hasn't been messed with for some time and is perfectly fine for the job? 😉

BenPinnick speaks a lot of sense but ultimately OldTalent has my vote

oldtalent - Member
Boost can F right off.

and the industry that's generating all this S*** can join it.

and the industry that's generating all this S*** can join it.

Disregarding the supposed marginal gains, the fact that half the industry was doing a facepalm as the other half pushed Boost through shows that some bike designers and companies are out of touch with normal riders - who just wanted stability after the wheelsize debacle.