but... surely these sort of things are not magically new design parameters and should have been well known - or at least could have been anticipated - when boost rained down upon us? If yes, then why did almost all manufacturers jump on boost instead of staying 142 or going to 157? Bike "design and development" is a bit of an oxymoron...
and thx, there is no where else in MTB media land that would dare offer this sort of critical and practical article (along with the informative comments - I've learned more about chainline than I ever cared to!)
Jan. 10, 2022, 8:39 p.m. - LWK
but... surely these sort of things are not magically new design parameters and should have been well known - or at least could have been anticipated - when boost rained down upon us? If yes, then why did almost all manufacturers jump on boost instead of staying 142 or going to 157? Bike "design and development" is a bit of an oxymoron... and thx, there is no where else in MTB media land that would dare offer this sort of critical and practical article (along with the informative comments - I've learned more about chainline than I ever cared to!)