
EDITORIAL
3,000,000 Sold
Half-Charged
At the end of 2022, SRAM's UDH-O-Meter clicked over 3,000,000 units sold. That number doesn't include all the hangers made by Nukeproof, North Shore Billet, Wheels MFG, and others. Those SRAM UDH hangers were present on over 200 different bike models, and with all the UDH frame updates announced since, I wouldn't be surprised if that number doubled by the end of the year.
At this point, we know that the Universal Derailleur Hanger was a Trojan Horse for SRAM to get a big enough hole and sufficient surface area on enough dropouts for their T-Type bushing and derailleur tower interface to take off. It's fitting that the first brand on board was Trek since they were also the first to adopt tapered steerer tubes, Boost-148 hub spacing, and the modern version of Trunnion shock mounting.

The original.

The NSBillet UDH is a gorgeous anodized-pewter piece in person. Photo: NSB

Wheels Manufacturing is making their UDH with fixing bolts in a whole range of anodized colours. Photo: Wheels MFG
The excellent look book SRAM printed as part of the launch of their Eagle Transmission wireless drivetrains, AKA T-Type, AKA 'Top Gun', is full of information.* For example, I would not have guessed that SRAM has already sold three million UDH setups.
Also surprising to me is that 50% of Eagle drivetrains are installed on e-bikes. As prevalent as machines with motor-assisted-pedaling seem to be getting locally, it shows that on the North Shore we're lagging way behind other locales in terms of e-bike uptake.
Finally, I was surprised to learn that SRAM started presenting Eagle Transmission to bike brands in 2019. As dominant as the UDH is with performance mountain bikes, given there's no downside in terms of running other drivetrains, it's a bit staggering that it's not truly universal, yet.
*"When there's a new project, we get the opportunity to come up with a stupid code name." - Stephanie Raulston, SRAM.

No word yet on the record for most bros standing on one T-Type rear derailleur. I also haven't met anyone brave enough to try this with their AXS rear derailleur and a UDH hanger for a proper comparison. Photo: Deniz Merdano
XKCD #927
"Even if there was no Top Gun, UDH does make sense." - Chris Hilton, SRAM
"Innovation starts with identifying a problem to solve." - Henrik Braedt, SRAM
Even without T-Type, the UDH design makes sense from the perspective of trying to match a hanger out of the hundreds of options in a catalogue. A hanger as beefy as UDH also makes sense in the context of a rider hero-shifting through all 565 watts of "Supernatural Power" behind their Turbo Levo. Oh, plus whatever juice their legs put out.
There were many existing hanger options that were plenty beefy, but there were also many shit hanger designs shipping on bikes at the same time, so while UDH is another standard, at least it's a good one.
And yes, I was sent the XKCD comic 3,000,000 times.

Universal Mods
For the custom builders out there, Paragon Machine Works has been making UDH-compatible dropouts in steel or titanium since 2020. And for bikes like my Waltworks V1 and V2 with Paragon adjustable dropouts, there's a UDH version of their Rocker dropouts available.
The Paragon Rockers have an adjustment range of 0.680" (17.2mm) and two links of a 1/2" chain are 1.00" (25.4mm) so there is a chance that the optimum T-Type chain length could change through the range of adjustment.

Adjustable wheelbase and UDH compatibility? The Paragon Rockers have an adjustment range of 0.680" (17.2mm). Photo: Paragon Machine Works

Everything you need to start making holes bigger! Okay, you also need a drill. And of course the standard disclaimer applies - know your limit, wrench within it. Photo: SRAM
No one knows what the future holds, but I know card-carrying Shimanophiles who won't buy a bike without UDH, as well as riders who plan to never own any drivetrain other than 10-spd Zee, and single-speeders who won't buy a frame without UDH.
More interesting are the folks who've decided they want the option to run T-Type on a bike that is clearly incompatible with UDH. At the end of the day, it's having a hole the right size for the T-Type bushing and a drop-out, or the combination of a drop-out and spacers that is the right width for the Transmission derailleur's tower. Of course SRAM doesn't recommend it, but would it still be mountain biking if a few scofflaws didn't try anyways?
3,000,000 units sold. UDH FTW.

Height - Steve Buscemi-ish
Wait - Patiently
Ape Index - T-Rex
Age - The same as DOS
Favourite Trail(s) every week - Pipeline (thank you Ken!) to Lower Crippler (thank you Andy!)
Favourite Song(s) this week - I'm Your Man. Nick Cave (covering Leonard Cohen)
Favourite Colour - Cosmic Lilac
Bar Width - It depends
Reach & Stack & ETT - It depends
Crank Length - 175mm except when it's 170mm
Wheel Size - Hot For Mullets
Comments
GB
1 year, 7 months ago
E bikes . Sorry stopped reading . Shame .
But that's my choice .
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
Absolutely appreciated.
Reply
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
Anyone have an advanced or whatever type account with Wiki and feels like going and editing the current definition of bicycle? Seems that those that would like people to believe that an electric powered bike and a bike are the same thing have managed to get it a semi locked page - bicycles don't have engines, PERIOD.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle
Reply
Cam McRae
1 year, 7 months ago
Are they “universal” though? Aren’t there different thread pitches and even diameters?
NSB has a list of bike that work with one of their hangers - and it’s only 11 bikes long and mentions specific years and models. And they sell three others!
I don’t think that word means what they think it means.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
They are universally removable to install a T-Type drivetrain. I think ‘universal’ means exactly what SRAM wants it to mean. Haha. But really…
As to variations, other than concentric (split) pivot frames like Trek and Devinci that use the BW version (‘Big Washer’) for their pivot at the axle setup my understanding is that every frame where manufacturers followed the UDH spec - readily available - works with a standard UDH hanger.
For bikes that have a specific UDH hanger otherwise (not using an ABP style setup) I think you’ll find that’s on the frame manufacturers, not SRAM.
Reply
Justin White
1 year, 7 months ago
Yes. I think universal regarding just frame fitment is the key. Changing axle pitch means there might be 3 or 4 skus for the hanger, but each of those will still fit on any frame. And since UDH also unifies the axle length a bit, there will end up only being 3 or 4 axle skus that fit any frame as well.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
What UDH doesn’t use M12x1.0 threading for the axle? That’s new for me.
———
*edit. Never mind, of course it’s Norco.
Reply
WheelNut
1 year, 7 months ago
Norco is all 12x1.0 thread pitch now. There were a few bikes early on that had a 12x1.75 but that is a thing of the past now.
Reply
AndrewR
1 year, 7 months ago
In 2020 Norco started with UDH 2.0 because they had a year's supply of Maxle rear axles with a 1.75 thread pitch that they wanted to use up.
2022 onwards are proper M12 x 1.0 thread pitch.
And between yourselves and another online bike website discussing UDH related SRAM patents and the 2019-2020 SRAM Builders tech notes (a long but interesting read especially if you are an engineer) a frame builder had to be asleep to not realise that T-Type Transmission was in the pipeline.
Reply
Cooper Quinn
1 year, 7 months ago
But after the list of 11 bikes, NSB lists "New bike models that feature the SRAM UDH standard."
Which probably covers a few more models?
Reply
earle.b
1 year, 7 months ago
A few early adopters went rouge on their own for axle threads. See Norco. Also there were some spec changes at some point in the early life of UDH that wasn't well communicated so there are some "UDH" bikes out there that can't actually fit Transmission. See Cotic.
You can also have a dropout that's Transmission compatible that doesn't meet the UDH hangers specs, a number of small steel framebuilders are going this way. The UDH hanger has some features to limit it's rotation that are not needed for Transmission and by ignoring these the dropouts can be slimmed down.
Reply
IslandLife
1 year, 7 months ago
This comment has been removed.
Dave Smith
1 year, 7 months ago
About 10 times today, I have written and deleted the phrase - "Every company exists to bring a product to market." Some work, some don't. Some consumers buy, some won't - eg Hammershmidt = fail and forget.
SRAM responding to an ask from its brand/partners would suggest there was need. Sure, they are profiting in the process and driving deprecation of older tech but that's just business in a time of fast obsolescence. It's not great but any means but I refuse to scream myself course yelling at clouds. Saying that double hurts as a disrupted photographer who is also an ad guy living in a new world driven by programmatic marketing - I don't sleep much some nights.
RE: creative/marketing. I wish everyone would get over it. Until the whole world follows São Paulo into the clean city laws its the world we live in. Just do it.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
“High-tech? Yes. But HammerSchmidt feels more like magic. The kind that puts you perfectly in tune with your bike and the mountain. No need to think, plan, anticipate. Just ride." -SRAM
The irony of invoking Hammerschmidt to dismiss its memory is beautiful Dave. BEAUTIFUL.
Together, we will never forget the ‘Schmidt Drive.
———
It seems insane that humanity is programming computers to do all the interesting shit?!
Reply
JT
1 year, 7 months ago
There's a Hammerschmidt kit being sold locally on Craigslist and I am mighty tempted by it's $75 asking price.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
$75 with cranks and a bottom bracket in good condition?! Oooo baby.
I ran my last one with an XTR front shifter and it was glorious. If you decide to buy it and need a shifter let me know and I’ll see if I can dig it up for you.
Reply
Justin White
1 year, 7 months ago
Are they driving depreciation of anything that shouldn't be deprecated? Frame-specific hangers had their chance, for like 3 decades, and have been pretty much universally despised for much of that time. That's all that UDH deprecates, since it still allows all existing drivetrains.
And it's arguably much much better to have the "hanger" as specific to the derailleur. So many future options (t-type is just the first example) become opened up, while not restricting any of the current options, which is rare in this industry lately.
Reply
olaa
1 year, 7 months ago
Yeah, UDH FTW! About time everybody agreed about one simple standard.
About those e-bikes that you don't see that much of on the North Shore, they might still represent a majority of bikes sold. Where i live, i know for a fact that most mountain bikes sold are e-bikes (we have one bike shop in town, so the market research is easy!) but you rarely see them on the trails. Seems like most riders that ride a lot still are on the analog bikes, and the e-bikes see more use around town. My favourite is a pimped out Megatower that is pretty much only used for delivering the kids in kindergarden :)
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
I thought T-Type was going to drag everyone to Boost-148 as well - as the clear leader in rear hub spacing / not necessarily because it’s better than SB-157 - but sadly not the case. Still, I think I’m jazzed about UDH. It’s a very good system to have as an only system.
Reply
Vincent Edwards
1 year, 7 months ago
I’m with you there. Super Boost and 35mm bars are both standards I’d love to see fade into the fog of history. Like TALUS forks. But then we have 30.9, 31.6 and 35mm seat posts… 42mm and 51mm offset forks for 29ers. DOT fluid and Mineral Oil. BSA BB30 BB92, …
I think I’d be more invested in wishing my Ripmo V2 had UDH if I thought we would see a nice new mechanical drivetrain that takes advantage of it. But I don’t think we’re likely to see another mechanical XO1.
But walking into a bike shop anywhere in the country and knowing there’s a 95% chance they will have a spare hanger that fits my bike? That’s GOLD.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
Mineral oils! Many of them. Certainly a selling feature of DOT brakes is one fluid available almost everywhere.
BSA has made a roaring comeback and really for mountain bikes the only other standard to survive peak BB adventurism is PF92.
———
As to mechanical drivetrains. I think we’ll see SRAM make a mechanical drivetrain that direct mounts in place of a UDH but I hope they borrow a page from Shimano LG and it’s ‘Seagull’ rather than ‘Eagle’ (doesn’t soar quite as high or as far).
It’s just easier to make a good cable actuated drivetrain for less money when there are fewer gears. Bigger jumps? Great, who cares. If you want tighter ratios spend a bunch of money on T-Type 14-speed when that comes out.
As you say though, the higher end options are all clearly going to be battery powered only going forward.
Reply
dolface
1 year, 7 months ago
I'd really like to see smaller range cassettes that skew towards the low end. I don't need/want a 10t cog. Give me something like 15 or 16-52 please. I'm not racing and don't need the top-end speed.
Reply
Vincent Edwards
1 year, 7 months ago
I’m mostly with you on this idea- and e13 makes a new 13-52 helix cassette that starts to tick this box. But then… if you are happy with less range, why not just run a 28t chainring with 11-42? Or 11-36?
To me [on a MTB] the advantages of a lighter smaller cassette and medium cage derailleur outweigh the supposed efficiency gains of larger chainrings.
There will be some FS frames optimized around a 32t where anti-squat and other dynamic traits get strange with a 28t.
I think this is one of those cases where we see design that favors racing [and marketing] over the design that makes the most sense for consumers.
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
@Vincent, I’ve had a couple interesting conversations with product managers comparing the range of a 32x10-52t drivetrain to a classic mountain bike triple. In a sense it’s about having the gears to ride on the road and up the steepest climbs.
I’m regularly spinning a million rpm and going nowhere on my single-speed so I recognize I’m not the target for this thinking. But the rational makes sense none the less.
Velocipedestrian
1 year, 7 months ago
@Vincent. Because my cranks are 4 bolt 104BCD, and 30t is the smallest that fits.
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
@ Andrew and Vince, please extrapolate on your disdain for 150/57 x 12 rear spacing, because I ABSOLUTELY can't figure ANY negatives after using it since 2014 on my Phantom, with anything from the good old M952/46mm chainlined crank to my more "modern" M780 51mm chainline cranks - you get great chainline, loads of clearance for bigger tyres, can do shorter stays if you wish, seriously, please tell me your "whys".
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
Because there is nothing wrong with Boost-148 and the vast vast majority of bikes from all but four (?) manufacturers already use it. Much simpler to switch to Boost-148 than SB-157 if one rear hub standard is the goal.
Reply
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
150 was already there, just like 20mm TA, but you can't sell more shit if you use existing standards, right "rolleyes" The move should have just been straight from 135/142 to 150/157, not 141/148, that was Treks' BS doing, better than 135/142, but not needed and doesn't improve all that much over 135/142.
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
@Lynx, what reality does that have in 2023 where the vast, vast, majority of bikes sold use Boost-148 rear ends?
Also, the evolution of the 15mm axle is much more complex than "selling more shit" but it's totally beside the point. If the actual goal today is to reduce clutter then the clearly dominant current standards need to move forward.
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
OK, yeah, I'll conceed that 148 is the dominant standard and much better than 135/142, guess I'm just a bit bummed that "my" standard didn't win out being that Keith properly implemented it what 11 years ago, years before 141/148 came out, but no one adopted it - already had loads of existing 150 hubs around.
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
@Lynx, I believe the first bike to combine a 150mm DH rear hub with a 73mm BB for trail use (with a front derailleur no less) was the Knolly V-Tach in 2003 - twenty years ago - I could certainly be wrong though. And SB-157 would have made a perfectly acceptable universal standard.
I think that history provides Knolly a solid backing for their use of SB-157 today, and I also think there’s no good reason not to move to B-148 along with almost every other brand.
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
Will have to look into the Knolly 150 thing, know that with their background it's something they would do.
As to they should move to 148 because everyone else has, no I don't agree with that, why offer an inferior product when you don't have to, 150/157 has many more advantages to 141/148, most especially WAY better chainline, I hope that they and the few other companies doing it stick to it and keep offering a better product and not "fall in line" with the industry.
Checked and seems you are correct, the V-Tach did have a 150 rear and was FD capable. Forgot to add, I was more talking 150/157 in relation to "small" bikes, like in the <150mm travel range where it "doesn't really make sense".
Also thought I'd throw in this little tid bit for those not fully aware.

Cooper Quinn
1 year, 7 months ago
Whether or not 148 or 157 would have made more sense back 7 or so years ago is somewhat irrelevant now, as the ship has sailed and 148 has emerged as a clear winner.
Reply
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
@Cooper, well, it was more actually like 11 years ago when Banshee launched the Prime with the option of 135/142 or 150, but they're not Trek and so "their" take on an axle standard didn't take off for trail bikes, was considered "overkill" for trail bike, good only for DH/FreeRide bikes.
Skooks
1 year, 7 months ago
If by clear winner you mean more common then sure, 148 wins. I don't see any performance advantage of 148 vs 157 though. I'm happy enough to use whatever axle spacing my frame was designed for since its easy enough to find (or adapt to) either of these spacings.
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
This one's @Bishopsmike the chicken shit who negged my above comment, but isn't man enough to actually participate in the discussion - don't be such a chicken shit, come participate if you're going to neg someone.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
@Lynx
Flagging down a comment you don’t agree with, or flagging up a comment you do agree with, without making a comment yourself, is a perfectly acceptable form of speech.
Your comment, however, absolutely crosses the line of polite and acceptable discourse.
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
I agree, upvoting without commenting, I do it all the time, but if I down-vote a comment, that is just a simple question asking other commenters why they made a statement or to clarify, then I also reply and think that that's the "proper" thing to do.
Cam McRae
1 year, 7 months ago
My issue with 157 is simply that it's rare, and for someone in my situation, generally with several test bikes on the go, it sucks when you have one rear wheel that doesn't fit the rear wheel of any other bike. Or if you have a hub failure, you will probably have to hunt around for a replacement and pay extra (unless you can find a Shimano and don't need an XD driver).
My Arrival is 157 and the I9 Hydra rear hub I purchased to retrofit my WR1 wheels came with the wrong rear axle. Both the rotation of the wheel and the free hub would begin to slow when the axle was tightened to torque spec. because there was too much preload acting directly on the bearings. I9 was kind enough to send a replacement but in the meantime I was stuck either riding a rear wheel that was too loose or one that wouldn't spin properly, rather than simply being able to pull one off another bike for a couple of weeks. I appreciate the clearance and chainline but I'm not sure it's worth having a unicorn that only takes unicorn parts.
Reply
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
@Cooper - I guess, but most don't have a plethora of test bikes and the need to be inter-swapping wheels like that, they buy one of two bikes and might have the wheels be swapable - serious first world problems. For me, down here, doesn't matter what the spacing is, they're all a damn pain in the arse to get/fix/replace because we don't have shops lined full of fancy bike parts and that's true for a vast portion of this world, so having/buying "the best" option is what I want/go for.
Also, buy good hubs, do regular service on them and you won't have to worry so much - I've had one of my Hope rear hubs fail out of the 5 sets I have and that was the first/early SS with the 2 stacked raced bearings in the freehub, which was quickly rectified by Hope and replaced with a good, strong roller bearing in future iterations - not the fanciest, lightest, most engagement points etc, but damn great value for your $$ and great life expectancy.
If more manufacturers did replaceable/adjustable drop outs, then this/that wouldn't be a problem, as it isn't with me, I can run every single axle standard on my Phantom, just a drop out swap away. I have wheels with all spacings and I do it regularly - 135/142/148/150/157 (don't actually have a 148 wheelset yet, but I can)
Cooper Quinn
1 year, 7 months ago
That was Cam not me talking about compatibility.
But I'd say even if you're not swapping wheels around between multiple bikes you own at the same time, there's still some relevant.
A nice Boost wheelset is far, far more likely to be compatible with whatever your next bike is than a Superboost wheelset.
Yes, as I said above, maybe Superboost is a 'better' standard and that's due in part to some backwards compatibility. But given the absolute domination of Boost in the market at this point, you can argue about it forever, but its a moot point.
And I say this all as someone who has owned - not reviewed - two Superboost bikes; a Switchblade and my current Arrival.
Cam McRae
1 year, 7 months ago
@Lynx - it’s important to remember that a downvote could mean; I politely disagree. As someone who gets many downvotes, often without clarification, that’s what I keep telling myself.
And yes, my “too many bikes problem” is fabulously first world but if you are a mountain biker with time to spend talking about hub spacing on the internet, those are the vast majority of problems you get.
JVP
1 year, 7 months ago
As someone who rides a bit duck-footed, I'm very happy to see super boost 157 die off. My heels pretty much saw through a frame even with 148.
Reply
Cooper Quinn
1 year, 7 months ago
Eh, I'm the same way. Look at any of my review bikes (or personal bikes) and check the drive side crankarm wear.
It's not a bigger issue on Superboost bikes than non-Superboost.
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
@JVP and Cooper, very interesting, because it's not something I've experienced and I'm quite "duck footed" in how much "toe out" I have and I've got size 13 shoes to boot, this on my Banshee's running the 150 rear drop outs from 2014. What size shoes do you wear, flats or clipped in? Could it more be the now wider Q-Factor to for shorter CS and wider tyre clearance? I'm still running mainly 51mm chainline cranks, but do also have an M952 set and no issues.
The thing is with Banshee, it really doesn't matter what drop out configuration you run, the rear tri stays the same, just the drop outs change the standard and I haven't heard many/any complaining about this issue on their Banshee's.
@ Cooper, sorry mate, didn't mean to call you on it wrongly.
@Cam, yeah I try to look at it that way too, that's why when I got downvoted for simply asking for clarification on why they didn't like 150/157 I reacted as I did, uncalled for IMHO.
Pete Roggeman
1 year, 7 months ago
I'll write more about it in future but SQlab has an incredible array of fit solutions for contact points - one of them being different pedal axle lengths, which might be useful for you (ultimately that's just a q-factor adjustment but they make it simple). They just released a new app that takes all your measurements (other than sit bone width - you still can't measure that by pointing an iPhone at your butt) including your foot orientation (pigeon toe, duck foot, or neutral) using the measurement functions of an iPhone or iPad. I just tried it and it's impressive.
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
@Pete, thanks for the heads up on the stuff from SQ Lab, already a BIG fan of their bigger sweep bar, love my 16 degree one. Will have to look into that as just got myself a set of 20mm pedal extenders and they've put my feet in a nice place running clipless pedals (just about the same as flats). Don't understand why flat pedals get a wider Q-Factor than clipless, makes absolutely no sense to me, none what so ever, your feet should be in whatever position, regardless of clipped in or not, body ergonomics is body ergonomics, it doesn't change because you're running one or the other.
Won't be able to use the app, because well, don't have anything apple, not a fan.
WheelNut
1 year, 7 months ago
Did you know Eagle Transmission is 55mm chainline only? Whaddaya think of that?
Reply
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
Who are you asking Wheelnut? If it's me, I honestly don't care because I don't see myself running/buying a new bike or that anytime in the near future, 10 speed Shimano is working just fine for me and I don't want ANYTHING electronic like that on a bike anyways.
But your point of it being only 55mm chainline, further gives providence to 150/157 over 141/148, because just like the 51mm chainline basically sucks with 135/142, sa goes for 55 chainline and 148, 47 or 51 work best with 150/157, so wouldn't want anything wider for a narrower rear spacing to mess chainline more.
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
@WheelNut
That’s true. But the cassette is moved outboard at the same time so it’s much better than bikes running a 55mm chainline with the regular cassette position on a Boost-148 wheel. Like 52/B-148 it’s not ideal for grinding uphill in the bailout gear - but riders should be choosing a front ring that maximizes their cassette use.
I understand (carbon) bike designers were looking for more space and for them 55 is a win over 52. I also think with o er half of T-Type drivetrains shipping with blender-bikes that it won’t necessarily be the lowest gears seeing the highest torque loads.
In terms of how I personally feel about it, Transmission isn’t for me so I don’t really care. But also I’m riding a T-Type drivetrain (part-time) right now and NSMB will publish my thoughts on it come mid-July.
Vincent Edwards
1 year, 7 months ago
Thanks for sharing the super boost chart. I think Pivot put this out when they introduced 157 spacing with the switchblade?
I agree it’s probably the better standard… it creates superior spoke bracing and chain line. And it seems like companies have mostly figured out how to avoid unwanted heal-rub on the wider chain stays.
The problem is boost 148 was already widely adopted when it came out. And it’s good. It’s certainly good enough for 95% of riders.
The only super-boost bikes I’ve spent much time on are Pivots, and to me they feel a bit TOO stiff. But it’s hard to separate design goals of a particular maker from the characteristics of the wider spoke bracing angle. I think where I’m going with this is to point out that a certain amount of flex and compliance is a positive trait. From my limited experiences I prefer the feel of a boost 148 wheel. (But I’m on the lighter side…)
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
I’d just like to point out that SB-157 made perfect sense with what Chris Cocalis was looking to create with the first-gen Pivot Switchblade:
1) Clearance for 27x3.25” Plus tires
2) Front derailleur compatibility
3) Super short chainstays
Items 1 & 2 have been irrelevant to most riders since right around when the bike came out, and sadly - as someone who loves Plus tires - even clearance for a 2.8” isn’t a priority for most folks.
The race to the shortest rear end is over and if anything the trend is reversing.
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
Legacy bikes on the trail, where & when I ride, etc., there are factors that could erode my perceptions, but I am fairly tuned in to the local shop scene and my understanding is compared to most everywhere folks are still buying a notably higher percentage of self-powered mountain bicycles - particularly at the high end - in the Shore-To-Sky corridor.
Reply
Adrian Bostock
1 year, 7 months ago
I suspect most of the bikes sold by the LBS here are are either e-bikes or your classic sub $1000 mountain bike. but you don’t really see them on the trails, they are largely bought by the same type of rider with different depth of pockets.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
“Here” being the S2S?
My comment is based on talking to quite a few local shop folks I know from quite a few different shops, and everyone saying they’re still selling a significant percentage of high-performance meat-powered bikes.
(Just talking about trail-worthy mountain bikes mind you)
Personally, I see lots of e-bikes on the trails. Climbing up No Quarter on Fromme I now always see more e-bikes than me-bikes. But I see quite a few fresh non-e rigs as well which is why I’ve been trying to stay up to date with what folks selling performance mountain bikes are experiencing.
Not saying we aren’t on track for the % of e-users to continue growing, just that we lag far behind other places.
———
Either way, growth of pedal-assisted motoring and motor-assisted pedaling is such that UDH is very much a winning standard in my mind.
Reply
Adrian Bostock
1 year, 7 months ago
here being southern interior bc. based strictly on observation. I mean there is definitely of contingent of e-bros posting up at the trailheads in their rigs, but compared to the amount of e-bikes being sold it’s a pretty small number in relation to meat powered bikes.
apparently I triggered 4runner1. gosh.
Reply
4Runner1
1 year, 7 months ago
This comment has been removed.
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
Which comment in particular and how is it ridiculous and ignorant?
It’s hard to have a conversation when I’m not certain which of my points I’m extrapolating on.
Reply
4Runner1
1 year, 7 months ago
Was directed toward @Adrain Bostock’s comment.
4Runner1
1 year, 7 months ago
This comment has been removed.
Christian Stevens
1 year, 7 months ago
This comment has been removed.
mrbrett
1 year, 7 months ago
> My favourite is a pimped out Megatower that is pretty much only used for delivering the kids in kindergarden :)
Good news. In a "buy it used but still fully functional in 4 years" sense.
Reply
Vik Banerjee
1 year, 7 months ago
"Good news. In a "buy it used but still fully functional in 4 years" sense."
I don't know. Only if the motherboard/controller, motor and battery are still supported or you'll have a nicely discounted lightly used brick when something inevitably goes wrong.
Reply
4Runner1
1 year, 7 months ago
Man you guys are cynical about e-bikes.
Reply
Vik Banerjee
1 year, 7 months ago
Working at a LBS I had to tell a lady her e-bike was obsolete and impossible to sell because it was no longer supported by the manufacturer. She was dumbfounded that the product she paid so much for was essentially worthless a few years later.
I don't know why you think it's cynical to assume the same process that is happening in every industry that uses proprietary electronics would also happen with e-bikes? Companies don't support their electronic components long-term. If e-bike companies buck that trend great, but I'll wait to actually see that happen.
Reply
4Runner1
1 year, 7 months ago
I’m referring to your constant negative ebike comments.
JT
1 year, 7 months ago
@Vik, I felt the same way a number of years ago when I needed a new power cord for my Macbook. Went to the Apple store and they told me my option was to buy a new laptop. They were sorta right/full right in that I could find an aftermarket jobber for under 20, and eventually I did indeed buy a new laptop. But not an Apple. Looking at ebikes with that same kinda skepticism seems prudent. Right to repair is only so good if you don't have access to firmware.
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
@4Runner1, not cynical, we just don't like them or at least the BS preface people give for "needing" them, the big push by manufacturers just to grab more cash and the fact that as Vik and others have stated, they become e-waste so damn fast it isn't funny.
Reply
4Runner1
1 year, 7 months ago
And peoples reasons for buying them affect you, how? Generalize much?
My point is, it’s tiring to see the same anti ebike comments on nsmb.
I’ve been participating in this site for many years (like going back 20 years with a different handle). I still ride mountain bikes, but my life has changed and I now also ride emtb. I won’t get into “the BS reasons” why.
Have a great day. Ride your bike. Have fun.
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
Speaking strictly about riding expensive toys in the forest, I won’t ever come to terms with the motorization of mountain biking. I dislike the “it’s you but better” marketing crap and I dislike the prevalent attitude of inevitability surrounding the mass adaption of them - at least among those that can afford them. And I find the idea of making & marketing them for children insane.
Beyond that I don’t have any real interest in motor-assisted-pedaling or pedal-assisted-motoring beyond the fact that I don’t like wrenching on e-bikes (which is why I choose to work at a shop that doesn’t service them).
The - typical for everything electronic as Vik notes - short life span is actually secondary to just how poorly designed many of them are from a service perspective and riders’ expectations that they’ll be reliable like mountain bicycles (which they are not).
———
That said, the writing is on the wall (the virtual wall at least) for everyone to see. Over 50% of new (actual) mountain bikes sold this year globally will be plug-ins.
NSMB is a big tent community with rigid single-speeders and shuttle-only big bike DH’ers and everything in between and the reality is that more e-bike coverage is coming. It’s easy enough to identify and ignore BUT it’s also totally acceptable for folks to continue to register their dissatisfaction that ‘mountain biking’ is no longer a human-powered activity.
———
Because I like it, and haven’t set the record for longest comment yet (I believe it’s currently held by Publisher-Pete?) here’s my reply to BarryW on the same subject:
“Barry, at the risk of getting flamed from both directions, by the end of ‘22 SRAM says 50% of Eagle drivetrains sold shipped on e-bikes.
I don’t think it’s realistic to expect many businesses, whether magazines like Pinkbike or NSMB, or bike brands, or bike shops to ignore that trend.
I think NSMB deserves credit for supporting writers, like myself, who choose to only produce meat-bike content. Take that with whatever amount of salt you need to flavour my clear bias.
…
On the other hand, the bicycle is one of humankind’s simplest and most beautiful inventions and in turn the mountain bicycle an amazing toy for human-powered adrenaline and exploration alike.
Clearly an e-bike, whether it’s motor-assisted-pedaling like the Fuel EXe or pedal-assisted-motoring like many of the throttle-optional machines on the market, is not the same thing.
I don’t think it should be an issue for you to raise that point politely as often as you like in the same forums that brands like Specialized started pushing “It’s You, But Better.”
Just recognize that you’re tilting at windmills.”
I think folks complaining about folks complaining about e-bikes could do well to acknowledge this has been a very rapid change to spaces (in the woods and on the internet) that were previously clearly defined as human-powered as broad as the bicycle categories from XC to Freeride were.
Jerry Willows
1 year, 7 months ago
I certainly wouldn't keep an ebike for over its warranty. It's definitely a luxury item as the resale is horrible, hard on the drive train, more (complex) components and your bike shop may take some time to fix it if at all. I think you'll need a meat wagon besides your ebike if you ride lots.
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
Have to agree Andrew, that while I think it was a very sneaky move on SRAMs part and I smelled something fishy up when the UDH was announced/released, it to me has turned out to be a net positive for everyone if we don't have to be trying to figure out just what hanger we need or be at the mercy of those shitty hangers, some idiot with a degre came up with like the one on the Vitus that is only held on by 2 measly M3 screws, that's it, not also going under the axle/QR/Clamp for strength.
2nd, can we PLEASE stop using that ridiculous BS "analog" name the e-bikers came up with for our bicycles, it's just STUPID, bicycles don't use an engine, of any sort, just what the human body can produce, once a 2 wheeled "machine" gets any sort of engine, then it's a motor bike of whatever sort and our bikes still remain just bikes, that's it, no preposition needed.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
I don't ever use the terms analog or acoustic to describe bicycles, so I don't understand the relevance of putting that statement in a comment addressed to me.
Reply
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
@Andrew, sorry, comment was just an aimed in general at all those who do, just didn't want to start another comment to say it, just pisses me the fvck off, don't try to make your new thing seem OK by re-naming my much older thing to seem archaic.
Reply
4Runner1
1 year, 7 months ago
This comment has been removed.
Vincent Edwards
1 year, 7 months ago
I support your term ‘blender bike’ to describe the e-bikes! (And I hope folks who ride e-bikes can appreciate the humor as well)
However, I think there are some good points being made here about the general tone being projected at e-bikes. There will always be some extra friction in play when introducing a motor to a historically non-motorized sport. It’s our job as experienced riders to NOT turn people off to engaging in conversation etc. Andrew, I think you and NSMB in general do a good job of walking the line between personal preferences and comments.
_
I also think it’s important to find ways to educate folks getting into the sport about misconceptions / pitfalls that marketing is sidestepping if one chooses a motor. Here’s my big two:
1) don’t expect skills to translate 1:1 … if at all possible, learn bike handling on a Bike, then add the motor later. I know several MTB skills coaches who have witnessed folks getting hurt on e-bikes because they are heavier and more complex to control. Yes, e-bike specific skills classes could help. But I’m currently a strong proponent of learning to ride a Bike… then adding the motor later for folks who want that.
2) Adding a motor: its a very different value proposition compared to a mountain bike. $2k to $3k can buy you a nice hardtail or even alloy FS bike that could last 5-10 years. Chains, tires, and brake pads could be the most expensive things you’ll need to replace. Compare that to 2-3 years before the current crop of e-bikes become devalued… and at a minimum need very expensive replacement batteries to stay on the trail. Know this before you invest.
Reply
Justin White
1 year, 7 months ago
Why was it sneaky? They offered something better, with strong technical details that made it easy to implement, and gave it away for free. They then used that a base to build something else better, and anyone else is free to do the same. No one else was making a better, more universal hanger, so SRAM did what they had to. (Shimano direct mount doesn't count because they were still frame specific, just moved the mech mounting point).
UDH's real benefit is that the [replaceable] hanger now can become part of the derailleur, not the frame, and hanger/frame matching madness can eventually disappear (it will always live on in the ever expanding retro world, but that's different)
Reply
Cam McRae
1 year, 7 months ago
Maybe not sneaky but being deceptive about it was essential to the project’s success. SRAM sold it by calling it universal but they were pushing it largely because of Transmission.
There was no other way to accomplish their goal, and in the end it’s pretty good for everyone, unless you have a recently acquired non UDH bike. Like me.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
Have you talked to Robert’s Composites about modifying it, Cam? A lot of frames are pretty damn close to T-Type fitment when you pull the existing drop out. Having seen what Rob can do with broken stuff I don’t believe it would be a big job with many carbon bikes.
There are a lot of non-UDH carbon rigs with long lives left in them - if he can come up with a process that works with a number of frames it could be a good money maker?
Reply
Justin White
1 year, 7 months ago
SRAM made it universal, and made it open because of Transmission. There, fixed it for you. They didn't just "sell it" as universal, it truly is. Since unlike XD, UDH is free to use on both sides, and also seems to be better than almost every other hanger style out there.
I don't think the "deception" (arguable if can even be called that, especially in the light that [some/many] frame manufacturers knew the intent from the start, and the public guessed it real quick) was necessary, just normal corporate behavior of keep their cards close to their chest, taking every advantage they can get.
And your recently acquired non-UDH bike can still run every other non T-type setup out there, so unless you must have Transmission on this bike, UDH and T-type still aren't exactly "bad" for anyone.
Reply
JT
1 year, 7 months ago
What I wonder: How many PM's knew the contents of the trojan horse but had signed on the dotted line of NDA's? It's a given if a co develops an open source design that they intend to turn a buck out of it in one way or another. But they had to get those who need to know in the know to make it happen.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
I’d assume the product teams from at least the largest brands knew T-Type was in the future come 2019. Based on both what SRAM said about telling brands and just home many companies jumped on UDH in ‘20.
Reply
SomeBikeGuy
1 year, 7 months ago
Direct-mount derailleurs, if not exactly Transmission, or at the very least the mention of them, were mentioned as part of the original patent drawings and articles announcing UDH back in the day, so I'm rather confused as to how "deceptive" or "sneaky" are adjectives being thrown around here.
Reply
Justin White
1 year, 7 months ago
The best thing UDH did is to help allow the hanger to be part of the derailleur instead part of the frame, ala Transmission. Now instead of needing a hanger for the multitudes of frames out there, shops just need a few types of hangers to match the small selection of derailleur types. Really that's just UDH-to-trad-hanger, and that bit of a t-type that is replaceable, right now, but it opens up options.
Reply
the prophet
1 year, 7 months ago
Still somewhat baffled that the actual SRAM UDH is two metal parts co-molded with plastic.
I have had them break in strange circumstance, like a very simple "bike fell over while leaning against a tree". Something that would maybe bend a typical hanger but for sure not require replacement to continue the ride.
Luckily there are full metal versions made by 3rd parties.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
“Luckily there are full metal versions made by 3rd parties.”
The fact it’s an open standard is awesome. The NSBillet replacements are very nice.
Reply
JVP
1 year, 7 months ago
I hear ya. Modern derailleur hangers should be STRONG. All the force is on the axle, not the frame, so let's keep them sturdy so shifting doesn't go to shit. The SRAM hanger is weak, and OEM hangers are made out of cheese - some 2000 series cheapo alum, not properly heat treated.
I've probably spend $2000 on derailleur hangers. Not exaggerating. Making them weak and bendy is a false value proposition. Straightening them with the DAG never seems to get them back to perfect by 12 speed standards.
So yeah, I'm pretty stoked for T-type once (if) the costs come down to tolerable.
Reply
Blofeld
1 year, 7 months ago
There’s an irony to inventions like the UDH: They wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for e-bikers chewing up their drivetrains in mere hundreds of kilometres, though the fact remains that stapling a motor into a bicycle chassis without redesigning the rest of the vehicle is daft. The [capital ‘T’ Transmission] is turd polishing, but it’s mostly harmless, I think. If more e-bikes add a robust transmission element to their motor assemblies they’d be better off and this whole hanger discussion will be moot.
I really hope that in two years we aren’t seeing SRAM and Shimano dm rear triangles for every high end frame.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
I spend a lot of time weighing the necessity any time I'm introducing a discussion of motor-assisted-pedaling into a piece I'm writing. I think in the case of UDH it's paramount.
I had an interesting discussion with a strongly anti-e-bike friend of mine the other day who's wicked excited about the all-in-one gearbox/motor combinations coming out and what he perceives as a future where derailleurs are for bicycles. It's my belief that when the dust settles, at least locally, it will be the truly 'stealth' e-bikes that prevail. Silent motors, bicycle aesthetics (thanks to downtube storage on bicycles), and rear derailleurs.
------
We will not see Shimano-specific DM rear triangles. They've patented such an animal but it is the off-derailleur battery mounting aspect that is important to them. It would be easy enough for manufacturers to combine UDH with Shimano's battery-mounting window to allow for less tremendous rear derailleurs.
Reply
Blofeld
1 year, 7 months ago
I hope you’re right about Shimano not (re)pursuing a direct mount derailleur solution. My thought is that the Sram patent described here would prevent Shimano from using the UDH mount for their own derailleurs. Arms races are arms races, and the whole XD/Microspline escapade is still a fresh wound, so I’m not optimistic about cats and dogs getting along here.
I agree with your friend about integrated gearing being a better solution for e-bikes. On the other hand, the stealth route you describe eventually leads to more durable components trickling down to cyclists (not just e-bikers) and keeps more service dollars in bike shops. I personally have no interest in riding either option, but sure, they’ll be less annoying if they aren’t noisy.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
Not putting any money down, but I’d guess the reason Shimano is collecting IP in this space is so it won’t be an issue for them to direct mount off UDH dimensions.
I can’t help but imagine, for example, that packing future T-Type road derailleurs SRAM won’t want to get the battery off of the derailleur to create a much more sleek, much less bulky structure.
With ShiRAMano it’s no different than all the horse trading SRAM & Fox do.
Reply
Blofeld
1 year, 7 months ago
Ugh, didn’t Fox and Sram just recently give up on the narrow-wide chainring battle due to escalating legal costs? Sram might roll over for Shimano on DM for the same reason…they could also already have an agreement in place to play nice. Anything’s possible. Like most duopolies, the goal is to rationalize higher prices and keep third parties out at all cost!
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
The way the full-Turbo experience eats drivetrains, integrated gearboxes is the only thing that makes sense for the mega-juice experience.
It does seem to me though, that now that Specialized and such have opened the box and every moto brand is jumping out with pedal-assisted-motoring options, that the big bike companies are really adjusting their focus to the bicycle-like motor-assisted-pedaling Fuel EXe type experiences, where T-Type or LinkGlide make more sense.
We’ll see…
Reply
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
Hey Mods/Admins, can you guys PLEASE fix how comments are ordered, seriously, it's DAMN HARD to try and follow right now, there seems to be no sort of order to them.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
This has come up multiple times previously. Comments get unreadably narrow if they stay ordered, so after a few steps they stack and then are arranged based on up/down votes. Not ideal, but they’re much more readable this way.
Fixes to make them easier to order include addressing comments (@) or starting your comment with a short quote from the comment you’re responding to (“”) once there are multiple responses.
The ultimate fix, as you’ve done here, is splitting off new comments instead of stacking them onto an existing one.
Reply
Lynx .
1 year, 7 months ago
I can sort of get it, but I still think just leaving comments to run in the order in which they are posted, 1st=first, last=last, unless you replied to another persons comment, then it goes in there so that that discussion is kept together and ordered to follow easily.
Reply
Tommaso Gomez
1 year, 7 months ago
For mechanical drivetrains, I've yet to find a better derailleur hanger than the Syntace X-12 system. Under stress of a crash, you almost always snap the screw before you bend the hanger or derailleur cage. It's got hex heads on both sides so it's so easy to replace the screw on the side of the trail and be on your way. Like the UDH, it's aligned with respect to the axle, so there's no need for hanger tweaks.
Reply
Andrew Major
1 year, 7 months ago
I've seen damaged frames where the button from the Syntace X-12 hanger has rotated and then future hangers don't interface properly. In that sense, UDH is a superior product due to its robustness. That said, generally I think the Syntace design is excellent.
Reply
ivi
1 year, 7 months ago
I really Like the concept of thr UDH. I'm riding a 22 Nukeproof Reactor and guess what: a replacement hangar is not available (in my country). For a year old frame that ist really a shame.
Reply
Please log in to leave a comment.