#!markdown
"I really want to take Boost and fire it into the ocean with a cannon. But if
the head engineer on this project tells me that it is the only thing that
allows a bike like this to exist, I’m willing to suck it up and let my old
wheelsets die on the side of the road."
…
When I see these bikes all I can think is "wow, there have been a lot of
manufacturing advancements in the last 15-years."
That's because, ~15-years ago, some 90%+ of the guys I road with had one of
these bikes. They had ~160-180mm of travel front and rear, they used 150mm
rear ends often, but not always, mated to 83mm BB shells to accommodate 2.8″
\+ tires with shortish "freeride" length chainstays.
The 83mm BB shells allowed for proper chainline and clearance for 2x
drivetrains with the 150mm rear end, but some bikes (E.G. Gen-1 Knolly V-Tach
circa ~2002) used 73mm x 150mm setups that would give you very similar
Q-Factors and chainlines to these current "Boost" bikes if setup with a
current 1×10/11 drivetrain.
New geometries have evolved to use longer top tubes and much lower BB's (the
latter aided by much more supportive suspension) but if it weren't for
significant advancements in carbon fiber and aluminum construction (frames,
rims, components), not to mention rubber compounds and sidewall reinforcement,
the similarities are more striking than the differences.
It's ~15-lbs lighter with better materials, geometry, suspension, etc -- as it
should be when you look at how technology has progressed in that time, but
wouldn't you say it's more Recycled than revolutionary?
July 29, 2015, 4:31 p.m. - DrewM
#!markdown "I really want to take Boost and fire it into the ocean with a cannon. But if the head engineer on this project tells me that it is the only thing that allows a bike like this to exist, I’m willing to suck it up and let my old wheelsets die on the side of the road." … When I see these bikes all I can think is "wow, there have been a lot of manufacturing advancements in the last 15-years." That's because, ~15-years ago, some 90%+ of the guys I road with had one of these bikes. They had ~160-180mm of travel front and rear, they used 150mm rear ends often, but not always, mated to 83mm BB shells to accommodate 2.8″ \+ tires with shortish "freeride" length chainstays. The 83mm BB shells allowed for proper chainline and clearance for 2x drivetrains with the 150mm rear end, but some bikes (E.G. Gen-1 Knolly V-Tach circa ~2002) used 73mm x 150mm setups that would give you very similar Q-Factors and chainlines to these current "Boost" bikes if setup with a current 1×10/11 drivetrain. New geometries have evolved to use longer top tubes and much lower BB's (the latter aided by much more supportive suspension) but if it weren't for significant advancements in carbon fiber and aluminum construction (frames, rims, components), not to mention rubber compounds and sidewall reinforcement, the similarities are more striking than the differences. It's ~15-lbs lighter with better materials, geometry, suspension, etc -- as it should be when you look at how technology has progressed in that time, but wouldn't you say it's more Recycled than revolutionary?