While I agree with the wheel availability issue, the reality is, 15mm thru axles should have never been a thing in first place. What did we...
While I agree with the wheel availability issue, the reality is, 15mm thru axles should have never been a thing in first place. What did we gain ? 10gr over the from axle ? An additional, weaker standard that doesn't allow us to use our spare wheels on our DH and Enduro bikes. Same goes for 148x12 instead of 150x12 ...
Mechanically speaking, nothing is gained with a 15mm axle over a 20mm. What we gained by going with the (mechanically inferior) 15mm axle is the rapid...
Mechanically speaking, nothing is gained with a 15mm axle over a 20mm. What we gained by going with the (mechanically inferior) 15mm axle is the rapid and widespread adoption of thru-axles across all mountain bikes, then road bikes, then gravel and CX bikes. If the axle choices in 2012 (or whenever) were viewed as a binary choice between lightweight XC-oriented QR axles and a heavy DH-oriented 20mm thru axle, I think it would have taken a lot longer for product managers to go out on a limb and spec better forks and axles. 15mm axles gave product managers needed cover (The best of all worlds!! Stiff and light!! No compromises!!) Weight was still king for most MTBers in 2012 in a way that it just isn't anymore. Example: the 2025 35-pound $10000 carbon trail bike from X, Y, Z high-end brand.
And realistically, the difference between a modern 15mm and 20mm axle is negligible. If modern DH fork designers were forced at gunpoint to switch over to 15mm axles, they could easily mitigate the marginal increase in flex by adding material to lowers, crowns, stanchion diameter, or whatever. I think some recent DH forks even offer the option to run 15mm axles? I know this issue has been beaten to death, and I agree that 15mm axles are dumb, but so are people and I think we needed 15mm axles as a bridge to move people over to the side of the river that values performance over weight. It's better over here, on this side of the river. Go ride a 27 pound trail or XC bike from 2011 and see for yourself.
How much of a difference in flex is there actually between a 15 and a 20mm axle? And how many people do you think have actually broken a 15mm axle? I always thought if anything the rear axle being 12 mm would be more of a problem than the front being 15 and even a 12mm i havnt seen to many issues even rear wheel casing into a rock.
Cedric Gracia has been riding them for a while. I like the idea of their Idyll 39 SC Fork, reminds me of the RS totem air...
Cedric Gracia has been riding them for a while. I like the idea of their Idyll 39 SC Fork, reminds me of the RS totem air, but I'm not a huge fan that they're only available with a 20x110 boost axle. A larger diamater stiffer axle isn't a bad idea, but wheel availability isn't going the be good if you need to get a new one in a pinch.
Out of curiosity does anyone know if they have a legitimate reason for choosing a 39mm chassis over a 38 or 40mm one?
Maybe we'll see some of this on direct to consumer OEM, semi-pro, and staff deal bikes for a bit. I'm certainly in the "never again" camp (I think my feelings about BOS may have come out in this thread once or twice already), but I'd hope my fellow consumer would wait a while before jumping into these, at least at- or close to the generally high MSRP with only the promise that BOS CARES about you because they established the BOS CARE department. Although even I'll admit that's a better name than the BOS ACTIVE DISTAIN FOR OUR CUSTOMERS department.
While I agree with the wheel availability issue, the reality is, 15mm thru axles should have never been a thing in first place. What did we...
While I agree with the wheel availability issue, the reality is, 15mm thru axles should have never been a thing in first place. What did we gain ? 10gr over the from axle ? An additional, weaker standard that doesn't allow us to use our spare wheels on our DH and Enduro bikes. Same goes for 148x12 instead of 150x12 ...
Mechanically speaking, nothing is gained with a 15mm axle over a 20mm. What we gained by going with the (mechanically inferior) 15mm axle is the rapid...
Mechanically speaking, nothing is gained with a 15mm axle over a 20mm. What we gained by going with the (mechanically inferior) 15mm axle is the rapid and widespread adoption of thru-axles across all mountain bikes, then road bikes, then gravel and CX bikes. If the axle choices in 2012 (or whenever) were viewed as a binary choice between lightweight XC-oriented QR axles and a heavy DH-oriented 20mm thru axle, I think it would have taken a lot longer for product managers to go out on a limb and spec better forks and axles. 15mm axles gave product managers needed cover (The best of all worlds!! Stiff and light!! No compromises!!) Weight was still king for most MTBers in 2012 in a way that it just isn't anymore. Example: the 2025 35-pound $10000 carbon trail bike from X, Y, Z high-end brand.
And realistically, the difference between a modern 15mm and 20mm axle is negligible. If modern DH fork designers were forced at gunpoint to switch over to 15mm axles, they could easily mitigate the marginal increase in flex by adding material to lowers, crowns, stanchion diameter, or whatever. I think some recent DH forks even offer the option to run 15mm axles? I know this issue has been beaten to death, and I agree that 15mm axles are dumb, but so are people and I think we needed 15mm axles as a bridge to move people over to the side of the river that values performance over weight. It's better over here, on this side of the river. Go ride a 27 pound trail or XC bike from 2011 and see for yourself.
How much of a difference in flex is there actually between a 15 and a 20mm axle? And how many people do you think have actually...
How much of a difference in flex is there actually between a 15 and a 20mm axle? And how many people do you think have actually broken a 15mm axle? I always thought if anything the rear axle being 12 mm would be more of a problem than the front being 15 and even a 12mm i havnt seen to many issues even rear wheel casing into a rock.
rear is different as there are (for most bikes) 2 supporting members, chain stay + seat stay, thus axle dimension isn't as important compared to a fork.
Its more so about the mounting interface being wider on a 20mm axle than the axle itself being stiffer, this is what torque caps tried to address.
But as many people much smarter than us, including the Push engineer a page or two back said, it really doesn't matter when including everything else in the system.
Mechanically speaking, nothing is gained with a 15mm axle over a 20mm. What we gained by going with the (mechanically inferior) 15mm axle is the rapid...
Mechanically speaking, nothing is gained with a 15mm axle over a 20mm. What we gained by going with the (mechanically inferior) 15mm axle is the rapid and widespread adoption of thru-axles across all mountain bikes, then road bikes, then gravel and CX bikes. If the axle choices in 2012 (or whenever) were viewed as a binary choice between lightweight XC-oriented QR axles and a heavy DH-oriented 20mm thru axle, I think it would have taken a lot longer for product managers to go out on a limb and spec better forks and axles. 15mm axles gave product managers needed cover (The best of all worlds!! Stiff and light!! No compromises!!) Weight was still king for most MTBers in 2012 in a way that it just isn't anymore. Example: the 2025 35-pound $10000 carbon trail bike from X, Y, Z high-end brand.
And realistically, the difference between a modern 15mm and 20mm axle is negligible. If modern DH fork designers were forced at gunpoint to switch over to 15mm axles, they could easily mitigate the marginal increase in flex by adding material to lowers, crowns, stanchion diameter, or whatever. I think some recent DH forks even offer the option to run 15mm axles? I know this issue has been beaten to death, and I agree that 15mm axles are dumb, but so are people and I think we needed 15mm axles as a bridge to move people over to the side of the river that values performance over weight. It's better over here, on this side of the river. Go ride a 27 pound trail or XC bike from 2011 and see for yourself.
How much of a difference in flex is there actually between a 15 and a 20mm axle? And how many people do you think have actually...
How much of a difference in flex is there actually between a 15 and a 20mm axle? And how many people do you think have actually broken a 15mm axle? I always thought if anything the rear axle being 12 mm would be more of a problem than the front being 15 and even a 12mm i havnt seen to many issues even rear wheel casing into a rock.
rear is different as there are (for most bikes) 2 supporting members, chain stay + seat stay, thus axle dimension isn't as important compared to a...
rear is different as there are (for most bikes) 2 supporting members, chain stay + seat stay, thus axle dimension isn't as important compared to a fork.
Its more so about the mounting interface being wider on a 20mm axle than the axle itself being stiffer, this is what torque caps tried to address.
But as many people much smarter than us, including the Push engineer a page or two back said, it really doesn't matter when including everything else in the system.
That makes alot more sense that its more the mounting interface than the axle itself. That probably changes the flex characteristics more than it does the strenght i guess.
That makes alot more sense that its more the mounting interface than the axle itself. That probably changes the flex characteristics more than it does the...
That makes alot more sense that its more the mounting interface than the axle itself. That probably changes the flex characteristics more than it does the strenght i guess.
Thank you!
Arguably, many traditional rightside-up forks could benefit from more torsional flex, which is why the 15mm vs. 20mm axle argument never seemed like the end of the world. Traditional forks suffer from excessive fore/aft flex compared to their upside-down brethren, but traditional forks have torsional rigidity to spare. Fox famously engineered more torsional flex into the chassis in 2014 when they released the air-sprung 40, based on their pro rider feedback. If their World Cup pro's need more torsional flex, to me that says something.
That makes alot more sense that its more the mounting interface than the axle itself. That probably changes the flex characteristics more than it does the...
That makes alot more sense that its more the mounting interface than the axle itself. That probably changes the flex characteristics more than it does the strenght i guess.
Arguably, many traditional rightside-up forks could benefit from more torsional flex, which is why the 15mm vs. 20mm axle argument never seemed like the end of...
Arguably, many traditional rightside-up forks could benefit from more torsional flex, which is why the 15mm vs. 20mm axle argument never seemed like the end of the world. Traditional forks suffer from excessive fore/aft flex compared to their upside-down brethren, but traditional forks have torsional rigidity to spare. Fox famously engineered more torsional flex into the chassis in 2014 when they released the air-sprung 40, based on their pro rider feedback. If their World Cup pro's need more torsional flex, to me that says something.
Its MANY pages back, but I made come comment about assuming that a USD (moto style) fork could be torsion-ly (idk how to correctly spell that word) stiff by getting the hub to dropout interface dialed in like in terms of contact area and tolerance wise. Dave Camp Said it was basically impossible to do without charging prices nobody would be willing to pay.
The question is the torsional stiffness good or bad, and there the line lies between good and bad. I'd bet my net worth Fox and RS know what the ideal amount of torsional flex is regardless of dollars, and what the ideal amount is considering dollars also. It would be pretty cool to do a blind test of torsional stiffness between a traditional 40 or boxxer and then incrementally cut material out of the arch until it is gone and see what feels best.
Cedric Gracia has been riding them for a while. I like the idea of their Idyll 39 SC Fork, reminds me of the RS totem air...
Cedric Gracia has been riding them for a while. I like the idea of their Idyll 39 SC Fork, reminds me of the RS totem air, but I'm not a huge fan that they're only available with a 20x110 boost axle. A larger diamater stiffer axle isn't a bad idea, but wheel availability isn't going the be good if you need to get a new one in a pinch.
While I agree with the wheel availability issue, the reality is, 15mm thru axles should have never been a thing in first place. What did we...
While I agree with the wheel availability issue, the reality is, 15mm thru axles should have never been a thing in first place. What did we gain ? 10gr over the from axle ? An additional, weaker standard that doesn't allow us to use our spare wheels on our DH and Enduro bikes. Same goes for 148x12 instead of 150x12 ...
While I agree with the wheel availability issue, the reality is, 15mm thru axles should have never been a thing in first place. What did we...
While I agree with the wheel availability issue, the reality is, 15mm thru axles should have never been a thing in first place. What did we gain ? 10gr over the from axle ? An additional, weaker standard that doesn't allow us to use our spare wheels on our DH and Enduro bikes. Same goes for 148x12 instead of 150x12 ...
Mechanically speaking, nothing is gained with a 15mm axle over a 20mm. What we gained by going with the (mechanically inferior) 15mm axle is the rapid...
Mechanically speaking, nothing is gained with a 15mm axle over a 20mm. What we gained by going with the (mechanically inferior) 15mm axle is the rapid and widespread adoption of thru-axles across all mountain bikes, then road bikes, then gravel and CX bikes. If the axle choices in 2012 (or whenever) were viewed as a binary choice between lightweight XC-oriented QR axles and a heavy DH-oriented 20mm thru axle, I think it would have taken a lot longer for product managers to go out on a limb and spec better forks and axles. 15mm axles gave product managers needed cover (The best of all worlds!! Stiff and light!! No compromises!!) Weight was still king for most MTBers in 2012 in a way that it just isn't anymore. Example: the 2025 35-pound $10000 carbon trail bike from X, Y, Z high-end brand.
And realistically, the difference between a modern 15mm and 20mm axle is negligible. If modern DH fork designers were forced at gunpoint to switch over to 15mm axles, they could easily mitigate the marginal increase in flex by adding material to lowers, crowns, stanchion diameter, or whatever. I think some recent DH forks even offer the option to run 15mm axles? I know this issue has been beaten to death, and I agree that 15mm axles are dumb, but so are people and I think we needed 15mm axles as a bridge to move people over to the side of the river that values performance over weight. It's better over here, on this side of the river. Go ride a 27 pound trail or XC bike from 2011 and see for yourself.
kind of the same reason why we got maxle type thru axles rather than pinch bolt lowers. Gained lighter weight and quicker to remove your wheel ... yay ... Also gained potentially skewed lowers if your hubs/forks are not perfectly matched which will ruin even the best burnished, lubed fork out there. Hopefully as we steer clear from that lightness BS for good, maybe we will get to see floating axles and pinch bolts, as it should be. But that also means, probably going back to 20mm as I am doubtful about the ability to pinch a 15mm axle, tho my Nicolai M-pire used to have a pinch bolt for its 12x165 axle so maybe it is possible with a 15mm axle.
@Primoz: how come did we gain stronger bearings ? I guess you mean for the 20 vs 15mm since the 12mm remained. But at the end of the day you can still get strong bearings on a 20mm axle if wanted, it is just a mater of hub shell sizing really.
You're limited on the outer diameter by the rotor 6bolt BCD or the centerlock interface.
A 15 mm axle gives you the option to use a thicker section bearing which means larger diameter balls which means a higher load capacity.
FWIW, 20 mm Maxle was effectively a floating axle as the DS part of it also had a wedge with a larger diameter, pushing the hub to the NDS dropout.
As for 150 vs 148, 157 is the correct comparison to 148 as 148 uses the 3,5 mm ledges on either side for the hub to sit in the frame, like 142 and 157, while 150 is like 135x12 where the hub drops through the frame.
Even standard hubs on Rock Shox forks compatible with torque cap are a problem for people, let alone rear hubs dropping through the frame besides getting cassette past the derailleur and inserting the rotor in the caliper.
Then, talking about 150 vs 148 (vs 142), you would come to the chainline issues you would have to deal with if you were to choose 150 over 148. 150 vs. 148 has to be looked at as 150 vs 141 regarding hub geometry/layout and chainline.
Regarding pinch bolts, I know I am weird to say the least, but hell no will I have pinch bolts on my fork to take my wheel off. I put a QR Maxle on my Zeb as I will _NOT_ use a hex key to freaking take my wheel off. So much so I had a custom Maxle made to fit into a UDH dropout for the rear. (I also would not be surprised if skewered QR through axles preload the hub more than a bolt on axle does if torque to a value where you can use a multitool to get it free).
You're limited on the outer diameter by the rotor 6bolt BCD or the centerlock interface. A 15 mm axle gives you the option to use a thicker...
You're limited on the outer diameter by the rotor 6bolt BCD or the centerlock interface.
A 15 mm axle gives you the option to use a thicker section bearing which means larger diameter balls which means a higher load capacity.
FWIW, 20 mm Maxle was effectively a floating axle as the DS part of it also had a wedge with a larger diameter, pushing the hub to the NDS dropout.
As for 150 vs 148, 157 is the correct comparison to 148 as 148 uses the 3,5 mm ledges on either side for the hub to sit in the frame, like 142 and 157, while 150 is like 135x12 where the hub drops through the frame.
Even standard hubs on Rock Shox forks compatible with torque cap are a problem for people, let alone rear hubs dropping through the frame besides getting cassette past the derailleur and inserting the rotor in the caliper.
Then, talking about 150 vs 148 (vs 142), you would come to the chainline issues you would have to deal with if you were to choose 150 over 148. 150 vs. 148 has to be looked at as 150 vs 141 regarding hub geometry/layout and chainline.
Regarding pinch bolts, I know I am weird to say the least, but hell no will I have pinch bolts on my fork to take my wheel off. I put a QR Maxle on my Zeb as I will _NOT_ use a hex key to freaking take my wheel off. So much so I had a custom Maxle made to fit into a UDH dropout for the rear. (I also would not be surprised if skewered QR through axles preload the hub more than a bolt on axle does if torque to a value where you can use a multitool to get it free).
Fair enough for the 6bolt limitation.
You took me back in time with the original Maxle, I forgot it used to be like that, which is a much better design than most (all ?) 15mm axles currently on the market.
As for the use of quick release, how often do we actually need to remove our wheels ? Unless you have to toss your bike in your car this is very rare, especially if you ride tubeless and most repairs are stuffing a bacon strip in the tire and pumping it back-up.
I agree 15mm is superfluous but there's a simple and cheap solution: just run Hope hubs on the front so you can switch between 15mm and 20mm with a simple end cap swap. (can anyone else chime in on what other brands have this?) I'm also lucky enough to be a RockShox fan, so my 15mm end caps are all torque caps leading me to have zero front axle interface complaints.
I agree 15mm is superfluous but there's a simple and cheap solution: just run Hope hubs on the front so you can switch between 15mm and...
I agree 15mm is superfluous but there's a simple and cheap solution: just run Hope hubs on the front so you can switch between 15mm and 20mm with a simple end cap swap. (can anyone else chime in on what other brands have this?) I'm also lucky enough to be a RockShox fan, so my 15mm end caps are all torque caps leading me to have zero front axle interface complaints.
hadley, i9, dtswiss immediately come to mind (i've done so with all 3 brands). i'm sure there's more.
nerd fact: my oldest hadley is a 20mm front hub circa 2002, long before 15mm hubs were a standard - and i was able to get a conversion kit for it.
I agree 15mm is superfluous but there's a simple and cheap solution: just run Hope hubs on the front so you can switch between 15mm and...
I agree 15mm is superfluous but there's a simple and cheap solution: just run Hope hubs on the front so you can switch between 15mm and 20mm with a simple end cap swap. (can anyone else chime in on what other brands have this?) I'm also lucky enough to be a RockShox fan, so my 15mm end caps are all torque caps leading me to have zero front axle interface complaints.
Will they still have the terrible customer service and poor parts availability that we grew to love back in their first foray? Time will tell!
This echos my thoughts when I read Iceman's post. Why would they be poised to try again when they clearly haven't cared enough the first couple of times.
This echos my thoughts when I read Iceman's post. Why would they be poised to try again when they clearly haven't cared enough the first couple...
This echos my thoughts when I read Iceman's post. Why would they be poised to try again when they clearly haven't cared enough the first couple of times.
Because they pissed off too many folx in the moto world and need a new market?
Mechanically speaking, nothing is gained with a 15mm axle over a 20mm. What we gained by going with the (mechanically inferior) 15mm axle is the rapid...
Mechanically speaking, nothing is gained with a 15mm axle over a 20mm. What we gained by going with the (mechanically inferior) 15mm axle is the rapid and widespread adoption of thru-axles across all mountain bikes, then road bikes, then gravel and CX bikes. If the axle choices in 2012 (or whenever) were viewed as a binary choice between lightweight XC-oriented QR axles and a heavy DH-oriented 20mm thru axle, I think it would have taken a lot longer for product managers to go out on a limb and spec better forks and axles. 15mm axles gave product managers needed cover (The best of all worlds!! Stiff and light!! No compromises!!) Weight was still king for most MTBers in 2012 in a way that it just isn't anymore. Example: the 2025 35-pound $10000 carbon trail bike from X, Y, Z high-end brand.
And realistically, the difference between a modern 15mm and 20mm axle is negligible. If modern DH fork designers were forced at gunpoint to switch over to 15mm axles, they could easily mitigate the marginal increase in flex by adding material to lowers, crowns, stanchion diameter, or whatever. I think some recent DH forks even offer the option to run 15mm axles? I know this issue has been beaten to death, and I agree that 15mm axles are dumb, but so are people and I think we needed 15mm axles as a bridge to move people over to the side of the river that values performance over weight. It's better over here, on this side of the river. Go ride a 27 pound trail or XC bike from 2011 and see for yourself.
From when the 2019 Boxxer came out:
"Last year a number of RockShox's athletes raced on what was referred to internally as the 'Lyxxer' – a Boxxer that was running 29” Lyrik lowers. And yes, that means some of the hardest chargers in the world were racing with a 15mm thru-axle. In fact, there were serious discussions about using a 15 x 110mm thru axle on the new Boxxer, which would have allowed riders to swap wheels from their trail bike to their downhill bikes."
From when the 2019 Boxxer came out:"Last year a number of RockShox's athletes raced on what was referred to internally as the 'Lyxxer' – a...
From when the 2019 Boxxer came out:
"Last year a number of RockShox's athletes raced on what was referred to internally as the 'Lyxxer' – a Boxxer that was running 29” Lyrik lowers. And yes, that means some of the hardest chargers in the world were racing with a 15mm thru-axle. In fact, there were serious discussions about using a 15 x 110mm thru axle on the new Boxxer, which would have allowed riders to swap wheels from their trail bike to their downhill bikes."
From when the 2019 Boxxer came out:"Last year a number of RockShox's athletes raced on what was referred to internally as the 'Lyxxer' – a...
From when the 2019 Boxxer came out:
"Last year a number of RockShox's athletes raced on what was referred to internally as the 'Lyxxer' – a Boxxer that was running 29” Lyrik lowers. And yes, that means some of the hardest chargers in the world were racing with a 15mm thru-axle. In fact, there were serious discussions about using a 15 x 110mm thru axle on the new Boxxer, which would have allowed riders to swap wheels from their trail bike to their downhill bikes."
I agree 15mm is superfluous but there's a simple and cheap solution: just run Hope hubs on the front so you can switch between 15mm and...
I agree 15mm is superfluous but there's a simple and cheap solution: just run Hope hubs on the front so you can switch between 15mm and 20mm with a simple end cap swap. (can anyone else chime in on what other brands have this?) I'm also lucky enough to be a RockShox fan, so my 15mm end caps are all torque caps leading me to have zero front axle interface complaints.
From when the 2019 Boxxer came out:"Last year a number of RockShox's athletes raced on what was referred to internally as the 'Lyxxer' – a...
From when the 2019 Boxxer came out:
"Last year a number of RockShox's athletes raced on what was referred to internally as the 'Lyxxer' – a Boxxer that was running 29” Lyrik lowers. And yes, that means some of the hardest chargers in the world were racing with a 15mm thru-axle. In fact, there were serious discussions about using a 15 x 110mm thru axle on the new Boxxer, which would have allowed riders to swap wheels from their trail bike to their downhill bikes."
The 29 lyrik lowers allowed wheel clearance around the arch. Custom crowns were needed to accommodate the c-c of the bore on said lowers. We built two sets for the 2018 season. I think we had to limit the travel to 190 though
Cedric Gracia has been riding them for a while. I like the idea of their Idyll 39 SC Fork, reminds me of the RS totem air...
Cedric Gracia has been riding them for a while. I like the idea of their Idyll 39 SC Fork, reminds me of the RS totem air, but I'm not a huge fan that they're only available with a 20x110 boost axle. A larger diamater stiffer axle isn't a bad idea, but wheel availability isn't going the be good if you need to get a new one in a pinch.
Out of curiosity does anyone know if they have a legitimate reason for choosing a 39mm chassis over a 38 or 40mm one? Maybe we'll see some...
Out of curiosity does anyone know if they have a legitimate reason for choosing a 39mm chassis over a 38 or 40mm one?
Maybe we'll see some of this on direct to consumer OEM, semi-pro, and staff deal bikes for a bit. I'm certainly in the "never again" camp (I think my feelings about BOS may have come out in this thread once or twice already), but I'd hope my fellow consumer would wait a while before jumping into these, at least at- or close to the generally high MSRP with only the promise that BOS CARES about you because they established the BOS CARE department. Although even I'll admit that's a better name than the BOS ACTIVE DISTAIN FOR OUR CUSTOMERS department.
So u cannot use dustwhiper or any other spares from other brands when they stop their business in a year
From when the 2019 Boxxer came out:"Last year a number of RockShox's athletes raced on what was referred to internally as the 'Lyxxer' – a...
From when the 2019 Boxxer came out:
"Last year a number of RockShox's athletes raced on what was referred to internally as the 'Lyxxer' – a Boxxer that was running 29” Lyrik lowers. And yes, that means some of the hardest chargers in the world were racing with a 15mm thru-axle. In fact, there were serious discussions about using a 15 x 110mm thru axle on the new Boxxer, which would have allowed riders to swap wheels from their trail bike to their downhill bikes."
The 29 lyrik lowers allowed wheel clearance around the arch. Custom crowns were needed to accommodate the c-c of the bore on said lowers. We built...
The 29 lyrik lowers allowed wheel clearance around the arch. Custom crowns were needed to accommodate the c-c of the bore on said lowers. We built two sets for the 2018 season. I think we had to limit the travel to 190 though
As i was intently scrolling thru to see if i could just pick up a cheep 27.5 boxxer and throw the 29' lowers off my creaking csu yari and have a yaxxer on my decoy. Oh well, back to work
How much of a difference in flex is there actually between a 15 and a 20mm axle? And how many people do you think have actually broken a 15mm axle? I always thought if anything the rear axle being 12 mm would be more of a problem than the front being 15 and even a 12mm i havnt seen to many issues even rear wheel casing into a rock.
Out of curiosity does anyone know if they have a legitimate reason for choosing a 39mm chassis over a 38 or 40mm one?
Maybe we'll see some of this on direct to consumer OEM, semi-pro, and staff deal bikes for a bit. I'm certainly in the "never again" camp (I think my feelings about BOS may have come out in this thread once or twice already), but I'd hope my fellow consumer would wait a while before jumping into these, at least at- or close to the generally high MSRP with only the promise that BOS CARES about you because they established the BOS CARE department. Although even I'll admit that's a better name than the BOS ACTIVE DISTAIN FOR OUR CUSTOMERS department.
rear is different as there are (for most bikes) 2 supporting members, chain stay + seat stay, thus axle dimension isn't as important compared to a fork.
Its more so about the mounting interface being wider on a 20mm axle than the axle itself being stiffer, this is what torque caps tried to address.
But as many people much smarter than us, including the Push engineer a page or two back said, it really doesn't matter when including everything else in the system.
That makes alot more sense that its more the mounting interface than the axle itself. That probably changes the flex characteristics more than it does the strenght i guess.
Thank you!
Arguably, many traditional rightside-up forks could benefit from more torsional flex, which is why the 15mm vs. 20mm axle argument never seemed like the end of the world. Traditional forks suffer from excessive fore/aft flex compared to their upside-down brethren, but traditional forks have torsional rigidity to spare. Fox famously engineered more torsional flex into the chassis in 2014 when they released the air-sprung 40, based on their pro rider feedback. If their World Cup pro's need more torsional flex, to me that says something.
Its MANY pages back, but I made come comment about assuming that a USD (moto style) fork could be torsion-ly (idk how to correctly spell that word) stiff by getting the hub to dropout interface dialed in like in terms of contact area and tolerance wise. Dave Camp Said it was basically impossible to do without charging prices nobody would be willing to pay.
The question is the torsional stiffness good or bad, and there the line lies between good and bad. I'd bet my net worth Fox and RS know what the ideal amount of torsional flex is regardless of dollars, and what the ideal amount is considering dollars also. It would be pretty cool to do a blind test of torsional stiffness between a traditional 40 or boxxer and then incrementally cut material out of the arch until it is gone and see what feels best.
My net worth is also very negative at the moment.
We gained stronger bearings.
Ohlins has been purchased by Brembo.
Will we see Brembo dabble in cycling like Ohlins has??
https://www.oppracing.com/product_display/19627-brembo-mountain-bike-br…
kind of the same reason why we got maxle type thru axles rather than pinch bolt lowers. Gained lighter weight and quicker to remove your wheel ... yay ... Also gained potentially skewed lowers if your hubs/forks are not perfectly matched which will ruin even the best burnished, lubed fork out there. Hopefully as we steer clear from that lightness BS for good, maybe we will get to see floating axles and pinch bolts, as it should be. But that also means, probably going back to 20mm as I am doubtful about the ability to pinch a 15mm axle, tho my Nicolai M-pire used to have a pinch bolt for its 12x165 axle so maybe it is possible with a 15mm axle.
@Primoz: how come did we gain stronger bearings ? I guess you mean for the 20 vs 15mm since the 12mm remained. But at the end of the day you can still get strong bearings on a 20mm axle if wanted, it is just a mater of hub shell sizing really.
You're limited on the outer diameter by the rotor 6bolt BCD or the centerlock interface.
A 15 mm axle gives you the option to use a thicker section bearing which means larger diameter balls which means a higher load capacity.
FWIW, 20 mm Maxle was effectively a floating axle as the DS part of it also had a wedge with a larger diameter, pushing the hub to the NDS dropout.
As for 150 vs 148, 157 is the correct comparison to 148 as 148 uses the 3,5 mm ledges on either side for the hub to sit in the frame, like 142 and 157, while 150 is like 135x12 where the hub drops through the frame.
Even standard hubs on Rock Shox forks compatible with torque cap are a problem for people, let alone rear hubs dropping through the frame besides getting cassette past the derailleur and inserting the rotor in the caliper.
Then, talking about 150 vs 148 (vs 142), you would come to the chainline issues you would have to deal with if you were to choose 150 over 148. 150 vs. 148 has to be looked at as 150 vs 141 regarding hub geometry/layout and chainline.
Regarding pinch bolts, I know I am weird to say the least, but hell no will I have pinch bolts on my fork to take my wheel off. I put a QR Maxle on my Zeb as I will _NOT_ use a hex key to freaking take my wheel off. So much so I had a custom Maxle made to fit into a UDH dropout for the rear. (I also would not be surprised if skewered QR through axles preload the hub more than a bolt on axle does if torque to a value where you can use a multitool to get it free).
Fair enough for the 6bolt limitation.
You took me back in time with the original Maxle, I forgot it used to be like that, which is a much better design than most (all ?) 15mm axles currently on the market.
As for the use of quick release, how often do we actually need to remove our wheels ? Unless you have to toss your bike in your car this is very rare, especially if you ride tubeless and most repairs are stuffing a bacon strip in the tire and pumping it back-up.
Point on removal, but still, I hate bolt on axles with a passion. Clearly, considering my hoop jumping for rear UDH Maxle 😂
I agree 15mm is superfluous but there's a simple and cheap solution: just run Hope hubs on the front so you can switch between 15mm and 20mm with a simple end cap swap. (can anyone else chime in on what other brands have this?) I'm also lucky enough to be a RockShox fan, so my 15mm end caps are all torque caps leading me to have zero front axle interface complaints.
hadley, i9, dtswiss immediately come to mind (i've done so with all 3 brands). i'm sure there's more.
nerd fact: my oldest hadley is a 20mm front hub circa 2002, long before 15mm hubs were a standard - and i was able to get a conversion kit for it.
P321 used to have this feature (15 or 20mm endcaps) on the older hubs, not sure about the new ones.
Vault hubs from Race Face can go between 20, 15 and 12 in front. The same hub design is used for RF mountain wheels and Easton road wheels.
This echos my thoughts when I read Iceman's post. Why would they be poised to try again when they clearly haven't cared enough the first couple of times.
Because they pissed off too many folx in the moto world and need a new market?
From when the 2019 Boxxer came out:
"Last year a number of RockShox's athletes raced on what was referred to internally as the 'Lyxxer' – a Boxxer that was running 29” Lyrik lowers. And yes, that means some of the hardest chargers in the world were racing with a 15mm thru-axle. In fact, there were serious discussions about using a 15 x 110mm thru axle on the new Boxxer, which would have allowed riders to swap wheels from their trail bike to their downhill bikes."
Any idea why they did that?
The 2018 Boxxer was 27.5 or 26
There was not yet a finalized and production ready casting for the 29er BoXXer is my assumption
And I was called crazy a couple of years ago when I told that the later generation boxxers could use a 15mm axle...
not the new ones
The 29 lyrik lowers allowed wheel clearance around the arch. Custom crowns were needed to accommodate the c-c of the bore on said lowers. We built two sets for the 2018 season. I think we had to limit the travel to 190 though
So u cannot use dustwhiper or any other spares from other brands when they stop their business in a year
Highly likely scenario from a company that has been up ad running for some 25 years lol.
As i was intently scrolling thru to see if i could just pick up a cheep 27.5 boxxer and throw the 29' lowers off my creaking csu yari and have a yaxxer on my decoy. Oh well, back to work
Where the hell were you when this exact issue with this exact company came up like 7 or 8 years ago?
Oh right, I remember, at the local o-ring store.
Post a reply to: MTB Tech Rumors and Innovation