Another New Standard? Here Comes Boost 20x110
We’ve hinted at it a few times during the past month, there’s chatter out there about 20-millimeter through axle hubs and forks getting the Boost-spacing treatment.
Wait—don’t 20-millimeter through axle forks already feature 110-millimeter hub spacing? Yes, they do.
What we’re talking about, however, is hub manufacturers spreading the hub flanges apart (five more millimeters on each side) on their 20x110-millimeter, through axle hubs. Spreading those spoke flanges will, of course, mean that the brake rotor is now five millimeters closer to the non-drive side fork leg and that, in turn, means that the disc brake mounts on the fork lowers need to be repositioned as well.
In short, things appear to be changing. Again.
As of today, only a few companies have come out of the closet on this one. DVO’s new Onyx dual-crown, DH fork, for instance, will feature Boost-compatible lowers. Same goes for Suntour’s latest Rux DH fork. Suntour has also hinted that their latest Durolux, single-crown enduro fork may be offered in both its current Boost 15x110 offering and a 20-millimeter Boost 110 version. Might we wind up seeing the demise of the 15-millimeter through axle and the return (across the board) of the 20-millimeter through axle? Frankly, it’s too early to tell.
You might welcome all of this news. You might, however, also feel like tearing out your hair over the idea of yet more changes. If you count yourself among the latter group, things are not as bad as they might seem. Downhill fork manufacturers, for instance, can provide rotor spacers that allow you to use your existing 20-millimeter wheel with their new Boost 20x110 fork (the rotor spacer would just shift the rotor over five millimeters).
Likewise, if Boost 110-spaced, single-crown forks suddenly get the 20-millimeter axle treatment, you might be able to use existing wheels with 15-mm through-axle hubs by simply swapping out the stock end caps for 20-mm end caps and adding a rotor spacer.
In short, at least this particular shifting of standards offers some backwards compatibility. There’s that, thankfully. Still, I wanted to talk to people on the inside who are knee deep in all of this. Why is this all happening? Here’s what Bryson Martin at DVO had to say.
When did you decide to go Boost 20 with your latest dual-crown fork, the Onyx?
But the cool thing is that it’s backwards compatible. If you have a 20-millimeter downhill front wheel, it still fits because it’s already 20 mil by 110...you just don’t have the benefits of the wider hub flange.
You and I are joking around here, but you know that is exactly what readers are thinking. I mean, I’m not against 20-millimeter axles at all, but when does this shit stop? And, in all seriousness, what kind of stiffness gains do you actually get by going to Boost 20 and spreading those hub flanges five millimeters on either side?
You know, Vernon, I was talking to Brent Foes the other day about this and you know the last time I folded a front wheel? It was 1992.
That’s exactly my point! Who out there is actually finding a 15-millimeter through- axle too flexy? I’d have been happy if we’d never left 20-millimeter axles on single-crown forks for 15-millimeter ones in the first place, but now that we have, do we really need to change it all up yet again?
Well, I listen to some of my top riders who really push the forks a lot more and they could go with a stiffer set up—they appreciate Boost—but those guys represent the top 2 percent of all riders. But there’s always a cost benefit thing to consider. The industry is spending hundreds of millions of dollars to get this improvement in stiffness for the top 2 percent… Is it worth the cost? I don’t know, but I know the industry is moving that way and if we’re bringing out new product we have to consider it.
So how did you even hear that your competitors are going on with Boost 20x110?
I mean, it’s real predictable. You see stuff pop up on Pinkbike, you see stuff at events like Sea Otter…you know what direction things are going. It’s a natural progression. You see when the momentum starts building. Now the back end of the bike…that’s still up in the air.
Ha! I was just going to ask you about that. If we are trying to eke out a bit more stiffness in the front end by pushing the hub flanges out a few millimeters—if that is crucial, then when is the bike industry going to decide that a 12-millimeter through axle at the rear isn’t stiff enough? I mean you have braking forces, drivetrain forces, a hell of a lot of body weight biased back there… Is there going to be a point at which the industry suddenlty decides to bump up the rear axle diameter?
Yeah, I’d have to say there probably are a lot more forces in the back of the bike. I mean how about landing a bit sideways on a jump? You have torsional forces, an incrtedible amount of radial forces going on… I mean you could look at it and think that bigger axles would have been a benefit back there.
Well, should we have just gone to 20-millimeter through axles front and rear to begin with?
You know, in my Marzocchi days, in 2001 I came out with the first quick-release 20-millimeter through axle.
Yeah, the QR20.
Exactly. And for us, I was thinking 20 millimeter axles made sense everywhere because, really, the weight difference between 15 and 20? It wasn’t much at all. And there was the benefit of just standardizing axle sizes up front. You still could optimize your axles, do some cool tapering of the axles, to make them lighter. All the hubs are still 20, they’re just putting 15-millimeter end caps on them…
So, do you see 20-millimeter through axles being adopted across the board on front suspension?
At this point? No. But it could happen, I suppose. It really could. You could make a casting that accepts either 15 or 20—you’d just drill it differently, but then you are also going to have extra weight. And that’s the thing, there’s a give and take. There are all these caveats. It’s like you’re in a room with all these black doors and you don’t know which door to go through. You go through door number one and you’re trapped and you go through the other door and you have all these girls waiting for you on the other side…It’s tough, right? These decisions are tough.
You know, your hypothetical worlds are a hell of a lot more interesting than mine.
Well, that’s just how I see things. I’m very 3-D.
Did the brake mount position have to change? There wasn’t any wiggle room that would have allowed you to keep the brake mount where it was and keep the fork castings unchanged?
We tried, dude. We spent a lot of time trying to create something with complete backwards compatibility, but that just created too many problems with adaptors or maybe the tabs breaking off, we just want to make sure that it’s as safe as possible and this is the best way to do that.
You know, we need some kind of consortium. Like a group of guys that gets together and talks this standard stuff over. It’s so important because we could do it without hampering or stalling progress. It’d just be a way to say, ‘Hey, let’s move, as an industry, together in the same direction." Everyone would benefit from that.
Hell, yeah. Right now someone is reading this article and thinking to themselves. “Damn it. Damn it. Damn it! When is this going to stop?" I mean people don’t actually want innovation to stop—they want bikes to get better—but they also don’t want to keep buying wheels and forks and frames, and then find out that the latest standard has a shelf life of just three years. That’s what it seems like it’s come to now and people are pissed. And rightfully so.
That’s what’s killing the bike industry right now. I think riders are so confused and worried that they don’t want to take a risk buying something new anymore. We went through so many changes. And now when the next change comes about, that $6,000 bike you just bought that you thought you could resell for maybe $4,500…that bike is suddenly worth $2,600. And that hurts the consumer.
Absolutely. I hear people say it all the time: they’ll buy a new frame or wheelset when things calm down and the standards stop changing every day, but things don’t ever seem to calm down anymore. And absent some kind of gathering where the industry talks about standards, we’re going to keep having bike companies making these half-step innovations that lead to standards that have the lifespan of a fruit fly. I mean Boost 148…I’m not saying it’s a bad thing, but how long will it last? Who knows?
It’s really hard to get a group of men together to talk about this kind of thing. There’s egos and we’re competing against each other—we’re so used to just beating each other up. I’m not saying it’d be easy to pull it off, but I think it’s what the industry needs to do. When everyone is trying to cut each other up, there’s just too much blood loss. It’s not good for the industry and it’s not good for riders.
I haven't ridden any new bike in the last 3 years that needed any parts made stiffer. If anything parts are getting too stiff. Screw the 2%ers! I'm sick of paying for there whims!
www.pinkbike.com/news/opinion-driving-with-dad-and-the-boost-hub-standard.html
www.pinkbike.com/news/opinion-numerology-and-the-demise-of-eleven-speed.html
Another point is that companies like Specialized and Santa Cruz etc really need to think about spending millions of dollars of with SRAM for OEM because ultimately this devaluation of bikes by new standard every couple of years is going to cause many to want to reconsider spending $7000+ on a bike. Why not save a chunk of cash and buy an aluminum bike from a direct brand that has the latest suspension tech and cut your losses with it every year?
Maybe it already is happening with Specialized partnering with Ohlins and using Magura brakes on future bikes. I sure hope that's the reason.
Nevertheless from engineering/functional point of view, as far as 120-160 forks go, pre 2017 Fox axle/clamp system was the best. That's how it should be done.
I just bought a 150mm Talas 5. With that, for doing my own service I've had to buy a "crows foot" for the torque wrench. I had to source a 28mm socket for $8 a few states away because $24 is too much for a socket that is not impact rated. And some other tools that I will only use on occasion and that will not fit to any part on my truck or car.
What I'm trying to get at here is that many don't have the tools, or even the time to do work on, or build, their bike.
Most of the "innovation" in the last 20 years has been due to three things:
1, does it make the lawyers (IP or Insurance) happy
2, does it make the product line cheaper to produce
3, is it the cheapest way possible to remain relevant
And most importantly, will it drive sales and pay for itself?
While from a users standpoint, it appears bike companies love changing standards to make you feel like your existing gear is obsolete and sell you new stuff, if you put yourself in the shoes of a manufacturer, you hate change! Change comes at tremendous cost: hundreds of thousands of dollars on new frame molds, new component tooling, and all the R&D and increased liability cost of the new unproven parts you're making, and nothing but the hope that the buzz is sufficient to sell enough to break even, which, most products don't. It's far more preferable to just continue making your existing product line indefinitely, adding minor, non-fundamental, low-risk design tweaks forever, like it's still the 90s, and sell with predictable numbers to meet demand (instead of trying to create demand for products no one asked for).
...until a company does what Shimano did in 95, and innovates like hell all at once, knocking nearly all the cool aftermarket component companies invested in making suddenly outdated products out of business overnight. Risk-avoidance becomes a risk in itself. Fortune favors the bold, etc.
So that's how things came to be. I didn't say I like it. My newest personal bike is a 2005 Yeti with an old Shiver. And I realize that its 26" wheels, 1.125"HT, 32mmST, 73mmBB, 135mm rear, and 27.2 seatpost mean that I can pop any of the parts off any of my other bikes and use them on it in a pinch. ...including an old mid-90s Merlin hardtail and a crappy old 1989 TREK 7000 in the garage. 1989-2005 about sums up the era of compatibility, and the most creativity in design.
pre-coffee post: shit sux man
post-coffee: allllll of that
Looks like I'll be keeping my 2012 until 2047.
why can't just the bike companies sit down and set a standard for wheel sizes, axle etc. I thought human like predictable things? so we can just plainly enjoy the bike without worrying about when can i find the rim, fork, hub etc. Life its hard, we ride bike to enjoy not to add into our daily things to worry about.
Personally I hate the cold anyway, but I'm starting to want to lean more towards rock climbing for the summer. Super cheap and way less dangerous than mountain biking for me.
Btw I think we we're currently in the situation when there's no point to call each component with different dimension a new standard - standard is something that's widely accepted, not something that's used by one company and not even on all their products.
Also, there are a ton of proprietary parts in the industry. Buckles are rarely compatible across different brands and you sure has hell don't want to lose the boot board in your boot because those change constantly and you can only get them from the manufacturer. Race skis often can only be mounted with a specific brand of bindings.
But the biggest is time commitment to travel. Cycling I have out of the door.
People need to realise biking is about smiles per hour not miles per hour!!!
People also need to be realistic about their riding. I'm still riding a bike that is 17 years old (a reynolds 853 framed dh bike that is now a trail bike by todays standards) and it rocks and it makes me smile.
Consider this. Nico V, Steve Peat, W simmons etc etc etc (any of the big of the big names) rode faster, harder and bigger than 99.99% of the people who ride today on bikes than many would consider substandard by todays standards, if you look at bikes from the 2000-2007 era before things started getting silly.
If you want to go faster - go to the gym, eat healthy & learn how to ride (i.e. don't depend on your bike to get you out of the shit if you mess up a line etc).
I understand in someways why bike companies feel they must keep trying to improve on the technology in the sport - natural development etc but also for sales - essentially once someone has a bike unless it brakes they do not need to keep buying parts etc etc.
Of course this is just my view
Oh...and yet it continues.
Well, pick a group of women.
The tactics used to sell products in mtb is shameful!
But I'm over it, I'll keep riding my bike till it's flogged out and I have absolutely no choice but to upgrade to something already out dated..
By the way bike industry go GET FÜČKËD..!!
I want to ride The fun 26" wheel size again but with the latest suspension, geometry and rim improvements. Just make everything 'boost' if you have to and then please drop the ridiculous 'boost' moniker altogether as it sounds so nerdy and idiotic.
Small companies offering alternatives are great for the MTB industry, this guy has his hands tied a bit with whatever new standards come out but DVO are trying to stay relevant so they don't go bust!
If backwards compatibility was properly managed from the outset with Boost, this while deal would be trivial... in this case, that backwards compatibility is there, the Onyx is future-proofed as much as anybody could get it, meaning that DVO had done literally everything they possibly could to minimize the high tempo planned obsolescence bs-train coming from bigger players in the industry. That's why I enjoyed this interview.
And my bike is going to be fine without the latest incremental change for years to come...
Same for rear ends. We had 135x10, 135x12, 142x12, 148x12, 150x10, 150x12, 157x12 within like what, 7 years? When does it end?
I haven't had a car payment in over a decade, and haven't had to buy any bike parts (other than tires, pads, and seals) in more than 4 years. The only reason anybody follows the next big thing is so they can tell everybody they have the next big thing. I will consider getting a new bike, and deciphering all the options, when one of the dentists on their $8K special can actually pass me.
You are correct, this is preparing for the introduction of the 29er dh bikes and suspension.
Time will tell if the 29" wheel is faster or not, but the industry will be pushing this as early as next year ( just my opinion).
Slope Style is still 26", BMX 20" & 24" depending upon application, XC Race predominantly 29", Enduro 27.5 and a few 29" (BC of sponsorship), and I still hold that if it is a true DH course 26" or 27.5 will be better and faster but we will of course see sponsored riders on 29" for the next 2 years then they'll all come back to 27.5 touting some new "improvement" making 27.5 faster again on DH.
Often enough I see complaints of bike shops not having stock of necessary components, but I can hardly blame the shop for it. How many outdated components are on the shelves of your local shop? So they then have to order the part in, but you know you can get it for 20-50$ less online, so you don't even bother. Rant over, but the point is they are killing local shops, and there is no way they aren't aware of it.
The industry really needs to agree on some "Standards" and there could be a few that stay around concurrently (we still have 160mm and 200mm disc rotors for different applications) - Change is good, but change too much too fast and too often? all you have is confusion.
However, to give everyone in the industry some slack, the stiffness tends to be overrated and it is possible that fork with fat stanchions like Pike or 36 if given QR9, would still be stiffer than a longer travel fork with 32mm stanchions with 15mm axle. These 35-40mm stanchions are not there for stiffness for the purpose of handling, they are made stiff so that lowers can slide onto them during bottom outs. 40 is often described as "too stiff".
One thing is sure though, it is a fkng mess right now, it's hard to buy a second hand components to match each other. And we can only hope that it will settle down once plus is here.
I'm afraid now that it will ruin my ride or fail...
I absolutely need that 20mm asap or I can't ride anymore...
Please a doctor now!!! I'm in panic now! And can I even leave my bike alone???
Won't it collapse under its own weight due to that old 15mm boost standard ????
I'm scared !!!! :///
Currently my bike have boost rear and non boost front; in order to buy new wheels I wether need to change fork or use adaptors which is ridiculous to use for hi end hub and frame, or go fully custom which will be obsolete in a few years
27.5 is great for trail, and I've never felt a noticeable difference in structural integrity or rigidity on boost wheels or fork or chainstays at all. I don't buy this BS.
So I assume if a Motocross can handle a 15-17mm front axle any f*cking bycicle can live with 15mm...
We people when on this events need to go and talk to the Brad's to let them know that they can their new size up to where they love it...
These days, the industry is attempting to charge that on one bike. The $8~10k "enduro" bike with the new standards isn't fooling anyone who has put in 1000's of hours on dirt. These days I ride an NS that I bought in 2010, and I'll probably build another NS for around $2~3k in the next year. I fix and build things myself, and shop on the good old internet to keep costs low.
To wrap it all up for you the industry. You had a returning customer, who actually purchased bikes and service from your local dealer network. Before "innovation" and "standards" went crazy I spent an average of $1k per year to ride, it was reasonable as I always had a nice and new bike. Since then I spent $2k on a bike and maybe $300 on online parts over the last 7 years. So now I'm spending 1/3rd of what I used to. I'm spending 1/3rd and I'm making much more than I did when I was a college student.
For now the industry can afford to ignore us. The sport is growing and drawing in new, rich blood that will buy into their ridiculous standards at a premium. This growth however is unsustainable. That pool of customers will transition into returning customers, and bringing new riders into mountain biking at today's staggering costs, is already prohibitive to new riders. Looking at the existing mountain biking base, are we spending more money or 1/3rd? What does it cost to transition us back to buying every year or two from an LBS? At what year of experience do new customers start fixing and building on their own? For now the industry can choose to ignore these questions...
Come on guys, please do it ! Tapered steerers are so mainstream now ! Current frames, forks and stems would be obsolete at the same time ! We need that ! Please please please please !
My trance i was able to swap out the cheesedick fox 32 (thank god it had an extra 1/8" uptop for the extra stiffness). Whole thing flexed under braking. I put a normal taper factory 34 and changed my headset. I was only able to get $100 for the 32 because it fit zero other bikes.
My anthem was ok, it came with a sid but it still flexed reguardless of the steerer size.
I won't go into a auto dealership with my 10 year old truck and be mad if the new version of this truck is totally different and better..... "No way with that new truck, I just want a new one like my 10 year old truck". I believe that's called being closed minded.
Bryson tells it like it is when he says this industry needs to get together and make settled industry wide agreements on "standards" changes. For the last 20 years they haven't.
But at the end of the day, all the BS gets cleaned up in the wash.
Also the author this article asking "should we have gone to 20mm on both ends?" Isn't aware(or has forgotten) about the short lived Razorrock Racing 20mmX160mm standard originally available on early Clifcat Cycles.
The whole idea of these standards (starting with the brutal murder of 26") has changed my perspective. I no longer think of my bike like a tuner car, I think of it more like a Honda CRV or a f*cking Camry. Use it for a few years, then dump the it for a new one. Don't invest in high-end upgrades that won't do a damn thing for resale value. Understand that there's going to be depreciation when you sell it, and try not to get too butt-hurt about it.
This takes a lot of the fun out of customizing a bike, but who cares. I'm here to ride, not to piss and moan about shit like hub standards.
Look at Bontrager and what they are doing internally to standardize their own product line and reuse existing procedures to bring costs down internally but also bring costs down for the customer. It makes perfect sense.
www.pinkbike.com/news/do-wheels-need-to-cost-so-much--interview--sea-otter-2017.html
if 29" is faster than 27.5, 30" will be faster than 29"! LOGIC! and 31", well thats for the real pros in 2020.
"Well, I listen to some of my top riders who really push the forks a lot more and they could go with a stiffer set up—they appreciate Boost—but those guys represent the top 2 percent of all riders"
So, don't be mad ay the industry - BLAME THE PROS!!!
To me it feels like "Be able to afford a house at some point or go with the ever changing standards"
The responses was: "you don't ride hard enough to broke a 15mm", "talk with your wallet", "ok, go and ride your cantilevers"...
Those guys needs to buy a new front wheel again. Haha.
I can't stop laughing.
1. tires..... they get flats...... more durable tires that are actually more durable......
2. (i am probably in the minority here but...) create a new standard for the rear derailleur/ get it out of the way or invest in gearboxes....
Those are the things that break on bikes the most, why not fix those seemingly simple problems?????
This little gem stuck out to me:
"So you can run your old wheelset—you just have to space your rotor five millimeters out and we’ll be providing rotor spacers with the fork that let you do that."
Who here is old enough to remember IS brake mounts? We're bringing those little shims back, with how easy they are to use, and whatnot. Now that's advancement right there!
Except you can't put spacers or shims on center lock rotors only 6 bolt.
They, this Mount The Boolshitz standards industry, should have never leave the once setup 20/110 standard in favor of 15/110 nonsense and now, they could have come up with this new hub standard. I bet, they are going to introduce 20mm axle in the rear wheels in a few years, which is totally logical.
This is nonsense industry. Of course it§s tough for them to gain profit when they think they must be doing these sadomasochist plays to everyone else.
Lead with how much investment in the Diamond (and similarly Jade/Topaz with Metric sizing there) you have had to chase with big capital outlays which only make sense because being perceived as 'behind' would overshadow any level of damper performance achieved...
If folks read the article, it's pretty clear within Bryson Martin's first answer that this is not a standard that DVO is creating and that they are deliberately producing a fork that people can use with their existing, non-Boost wheels. Some topics are thorny and require that people not skim the article. So it goes.
Clearly, this issue of standards constantly changing pisses me off--it's why I keep beating the drum about it. I want products to get better, but I also want the bike industry to more carefully consider how they can innovate without leaving a train of rapidly-incompatible bikes and parts in their wake.
So I'd take what DVO's saying seriously. Some of these companies aren't out to provide the best product to the consumer but rather to eek out money for their shareholders. Don't kid yourselves guys, this is a multi-billion dollar industry. As an outsider in a significantly more robust mfg industry, it's clear who's making better product, and who's got the customer in mind.
Aw cool dad, can we go?
....NO.
Its like i went to bed in 2008 dreaming of riding my bike, and while i was asleep i missed 142 &148mm spacing, 15mm axles bla, bla, bla. waking up and things are comming back around. Ill just keep enjoying riding my outdated bike.
www.rideformula.com/products/mtb-forks/mtb-fork-selva
it was "easy to predict" yeah for sure!
PB: "So.... you gonna revive the dead 20mm axle standard?"
Fork dude: "yeah... see, the industry trends predict that..."
PB: "Dont, just f*cking don't"
Fork dude: "but... but"
PB: "just... don't! you're embarrassing yourself. please, just don't. thank you, bye bye now".
Waiting on the next gen. Nomad with boost squared and a Fox 39
goo.gl/images/SdGXDd
www.pinkbike.com/news/formula-introducing-the-all-new-linea-g-gravity-wheels.html
DVOsuspension, hey, you might know me, but im sure you still don't know how to setup a jade in a single pivot mtb
- the bike industry
If you don;t boycott this crap, you will prove them right.
If it's over 3 feet I'll be impressed.
by the long D*CK of the MTB industry.
just like we boycott Target for their mentally deranged bathroom policy and watched their value drop over 40% ($20 billion)
and now they are firing executives and changing back to the old way.
Same goes for starbucks.. after that stupid exec spoke out against Trump saying he would hire 10,000 refugees...it backfired... they're suffering big time.
BOYCOTTS WORK IN A CONSUMER BASED CULTURE
(crickets chirping)