Whats the largest tire a Boost for with 110 x 15 hub spacing take .
I thought chain stay and seat stays were at the back of the bike , Im pretty new to this stuff sorry if im wrongIt is nothing to do with boost. Largest tyre size depends on the clearance of the frame at the point that the tyre sweeps the chain stays and seat stays.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ivan , thanks for the reply . Dose boost and Fatty be the same ? . Im getting a new bike it comes with a boost 110x 15 . I dont want to crazy fatty on the front but Im assuming larger trail/enduro tires are in the pipe line ? 2.6 maybeThere is around 3.6" clearance on my boost fox 34. So a 3.0" tyre should fit comfortably.
Actually lets see how clever you are , Why is the industry going to 148 hub spacingIt is nothing to do with boost. Largest tyre size depends on the clearance of the frame at the point that the tyre sweeps the chain stays and seat stays.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ivan , thanks for the reply . Dose boost and Fatty be the same ? . Im getting a new bike it comes with a boost 110x 15 . I dont want to crazy fatty on the front but Im assuming larger trail/enduro tires are in the pipe line ? 2.6 maybe
I think that's already been established with his first post.Actually lets see how clever you are , Why is the industry going to 148 hub spacing
Guessing when you're talking fattie, you're talking the Specialized Stumpy 6fattie? And btw, fuck Spesh for calling something that's not a fat bike a fattie - way to confuse everyone you arse hats!I'm not 100% on whether the boost fork and the fattie fork are exactly the same, but I expect if they aren't they'd be pretty close. I have a 29" boost fork which is where i got the measurement, and those schematics are for the fatty.
Guessing when you're talking fattie, you're talking the Specialized Stumpy 6fattie? And btw, fuck Spesh for calling something that's not a fat bike a fattie - way to confuse everyone you arse hats!
If so, then the 6fattie has a 110mm hub, same as the boost. Runs 3" wheels as standard too, front and back.
Ahh no probs. And yeah, anything aside from fatty has got to be a better term. All the different specs are confusing enough as it is, without manufacturer's bike names making it even worse.Nah i was just referring to 27.5+ in general. I'd prefer to call it "plus"or "chubby", rather than fatty. My fork is a plain old 29er boost fork.
Marketing, Bill Shooks (American Classic) interpretation:Actually lets see how clever you are , Why is the industry going to 148 hub spacing
Oh , you again . The bloody school teacher . Just give me a minute to punch myself in the face before i reply .Marketing, Bill Shooks (American Classic) interpretation:
"Bill didn't seem to be a fan of the new Boost standard, and says he only produced these hubs to give his customers the option. He feels that the industry isn't thinking outside of the box, and suggests the main reason for Boost is to move the chain line further outboard, to give clearance for wider tyres and shorter chainstays, not to create wider hub and stronger wheel. He's a fan of Cannondale's F-Si cross-country race machine which uses an offset rear end to achieve the same effect. The F-Si has some of the shortest 29er chainstays on market with suitable rear wheel clearance and chain line. "We didn't need the Boost standard in this ever-changing industry, and could have simply used non-symmetrical rear ends to achieve the same results" - http://www.pinkbike.com/news/american-classic-taipei-show-2015.html
Oh , you again . The bloody school teacher . Just give me a minute to punch myself in the face before i reply .
Scarred from too much time standing in the corner are we?ooooo , ahhhh ow .... That hert .....
Marketing, Bill Shooks (American Classic) interpretation:
"Bill didn't seem to be a fan of the new Boost standard, and says he only produced these hubs to give his customers the option. He feels that the industry isn't thinking outside of the box, and suggests the main reason for Boost is to move the chain line further outboard, to give clearance for wider tyres and shorter chainstays, not to create wider hub and stronger wheel. He's a fan of Cannondale's F-Si cross-country race machine which uses an offset rear end to achieve the same effect. The F-Si has some of the shortest 29er chainstays on market with suitable rear wheel clearance and chain line. "We didn't need the Boost standard in this ever-changing industry, and could have simply used non-symmetrical rear ends to achieve the same results" - http://www.pinkbike.com/news/american-classic-taipei-show-2015.html
Indeed.It would be interesting for someone who understands the math (not me) to work out the the strength of the two scenarios to see if Bill is right. Is a wheel with symmetrical spoke bracing angles stronger than one with an assymetrical but wider angle?