Here’s an interesting factoid/hot take. A very proficient mechanic friend of mine runs Superboost hubs on all his standard boost bikes. Specifically Norcos. The wheel just...
Here’s an interesting factoid/hot take. A very proficient mechanic friend of mine runs Superboost hubs on all his standard boost bikes. Specifically Norcos. The wheel just pops right in there.
I would never do this, and I constantly raise an eyebrow at his set up. He’s been doing it for years and hasn’t noticed any ill side effects. Every drivetrain he’s used, including Transmission hasn’t reared any ugly shifting side effects, nor has he noticed any premature bearing wear or binding issues.
He prefers Superboost because to him, it builds a stronger wheel. He would have never tried it, except he was coming off a Devinci and didn’t want to build a new rear wheel.
So your friend just jams in a hub that is 9mm wider than the chainstays are designed for?What shop does he work at? Just so I...
So your friend just jams in a hub that is 9mm wider than the chainstays are designed for?
What shop does he work at? Just so I can make sure I never go there.
Yeah that doesn't sound like a great idea at all, the strength increase of superboost is negligible and you are better off with a slightly beefier rim if you need that. Frames do not like being kept in a stressed state like that and won't be good for the frame or the bearings
again, what does it matter if the whole field loses stack height? no one has answered this question. we trade watts for rollover if the field finds 32 to be advantageous enough. people are talking like they have ran the tests but it simply comes down to the efficiency of the larger wheel vs power lost through geo changes. obviously this will be course and rider dependent but saying "less power in that position" doesn't account for the rest of the equation. and "fit" in terms of rider preference of what feels nice, well those XC bikes aint ergo so I think that some stack won't kill anyone.
edit: well shoot, just realized that if 32 is an advantage, and a taller rider is able to run the 32 without a significant loss of power, that could really suck for a shorter rider who isn't able to put out the watts in a 32 cockpit. we might turn XC into the NBA lol.
edit again: just imagining the arms race continuing with teams getting taller and taller riders to ride bigger and bigger bikes until we get to 36ers (finally!)
Weirdest thing about it? Wheel goes in there like it’s a perfect fit. Previous and current generation Sight FWIW. And for the record, he doesn’t tell people...
Weirdest thing about it? Wheel goes in there like it’s a perfect fit. Previous and current generation Sight FWIW.
And for the record, he doesn’t tell people to do this.
I've been fretting over stuffing a Frankenstein'd wheel with 150mm spacing into a standard boost frame for the past week. Between having a bright, trustworthy industry individual tell me not to sweat +/-1(or 2) mm at the axle, and reading your comments, I feel not so worried 🤣🤣🤣
Weirdest thing about it? Wheel goes in there like it’s a perfect fit. Previous and current generation Sight FWIW. And for the record, he doesn’t tell people...
Weirdest thing about it? Wheel goes in there like it’s a perfect fit. Previous and current generation Sight FWIW.
And for the record, he doesn’t tell people to do this.
I've been fretting over stuffing a Frankenstein'd wheel with 150mm spacing into a standard boost frame for the past week. Between having a bright, trustworthy industry...
I've been fretting over stuffing a Frankenstein'd wheel with 150mm spacing into a standard boost frame for the past week. Between having a bright, trustworthy industry individual tell me not to sweat +/-1(or 2) mm at the axle, and reading your comments, I feel not so worried 🤣🤣🤣
150 mm and 157 mm hubs are not the same, the hub endcap to rotor and cassette spacing is different.
This is not the case for 148 and 157 hubs, in that case only the middle of the hub is wider (same width as a 150 mm hub).
sick paint, well done Trek for once, love to see a good seat, new grips, proper tyres, a proper Raceface Era handlebar instead of that stupid one piece carbon cockpit that kills your hand with stiffness, impressed
sick paint, well done Trek for once, love to see a good seat, new grips, proper tyres, a proper Raceface Era handlebar instead of that stupid...
sick paint, well done Trek for once, love to see a good seat, new grips, proper tyres, a proper Raceface Era handlebar instead of that stupid one piece carbon cockpit that kills your hand with stiffness, impressed
I think the complaint people will bring up would be the chainstays being the same size in all the sizes and different travels, although I haven't found a geo chart for the LX yet so maybe they might be different but I would be surprised. Don't really know enough about geo to know if that's actually a problem but I do like the other adjustability options, e.g the headset cups, interchangeable rocker links to adjust travel, progression flip chip for the shock.
The travel adjusts by changing the rocker links out and changing the stroke length of the shock, e.g the EX is 205x60, LX and MX are 205x65mm. Looks like they have made the rocker links pretty easy to manufacture as well being a two piece design which generally would be easier to make two flatter parts compared to a one piece rocker which usually requires more machine time. Downside is usually stiffness but Trek uses the two piece design on the rest of their bikes and they seem to hold up well. I imagine it requires a bit more engineering work going into the frame to make sure it can take the loads through that area.
Solid update over the prior models. Should be a compelling option for people starting out who aren't quite sure what type of riding they want to be doing or for people who want a bike that suits their local terrain but can easily be changed up to go bigger for bike park use.
from the insta stories of Jason Moeschler, the CEO of Evil bikes, new lineup is close, not this month but close, no new insurgent yet, the...
from the insta stories of Jason Moeschler, the CEO of Evil bikes, new lineup is close, not this month but close, no new insurgent yet, the other ones are being raced and tested by their riders, they're not working on a full on dh bike but on something longer travel than anything currently offered ( 166mm for the Wreckoning and 168 for the Insurgent ), no short travel mullet bike in the works.
It doesn't seem like they're doing a very good job with this embargo.
Well, the last time they tried to do a huge launch - where they properly kept everything under wraps on the dealer side, put a countdown on the website, and said something along the lines of "the biggest innovation in bikes since carbon fiber".... it turned out to be wavecell.
So maybe they're just happy soft launching dealer side and then doing a proper launch a bit later without too much fuss.
Fuel+Dumb name, if you can't put the name in the URL of your webpage tReK you've goofed. Slash+ should of been Slash-e, it sounds like Slashy, you...
Fuel+
Dumb name, if you can't put the name in the URL of your webpage tReK you've goofed.
Slash+ should of been Slash-e, it sounds like Slashy, you took that from us trek, you took that from me 🥺
If I were in that meeting I'd have suggested the electric versions of our existing range got an "ER" designation for "enhanced ride" or "extended range," then you'd have the SlashER, FuelER, and SessionER. Kinda falls apart for the SupercaliberER, however. 😂
I mentioned it in the Powerplay SL review, but Dyname, Rocky Mountain’s in house motor company, is seeking to get involved with additional bike companies.
”As we enter a new era, we're thrilled to announce that we're now open for business and eager to help new bike brands develop their electric lineups. While we'll continue our valued collaboration with Rocky Mountain, our exclusive partnership has evolved to this exciting new stage.”
I mentioned it in the Powerplay SL review, but Dyname, Rocky Mountain’s in house motor company, is seeking to get involved with additional bike companies. ”As we...
I mentioned it in the Powerplay SL review, but Dyname, Rocky Mountain’s in house motor company, is seeking to get involved with additional bike companies.
”As we enter a new era, we're thrilled to announce that we're now open for business and eager to help new bike brands develop their electric lineups. While we'll continue our valued collaboration with Rocky Mountain, our exclusive partnership has evolved to this exciting new stage.”
I mentioned it in the Powerplay SL review, but Dyname, Rocky Mountain’s in house motor company, is seeking to get involved with additional bike companies. ”As we...
I mentioned it in the Powerplay SL review, but Dyname, Rocky Mountain’s in house motor company, is seeking to get involved with additional bike companies.
”As we enter a new era, we're thrilled to announce that we're now open for business and eager to help new bike brands develop their electric lineups. While we'll continue our valued collaboration with Rocky Mountain, our exclusive partnership has evolved to this exciting new stage.”
They aren't in house. They used to share an ownership group, and now they don't. I get it the confusion they're both owned by Quebecois but they...
They aren't in house. They used to share an ownership group, and now they don't.
I get it the confusion they're both owned by Quebecois but they don't all look the same.
The information available was on the site was vague but what lead me to the conclusion of being the same company is that Dyname and Rocky share the same address in Quebec. Too bad the old version of Dyname’s website is gone.
Funny thing is that they are a private owned company. They can't even blame 'market pressure' for every sh1tty penny pinching anti competition decision they make. It's just Dick Burke being a douch canoe.
I mentioned it in the Powerplay SL review, but Dyname, Rocky Mountain’s in house motor company, is seeking to get involved with additional bike companies. ”As we...
I mentioned it in the Powerplay SL review, but Dyname, Rocky Mountain’s in house motor company, is seeking to get involved with additional bike companies.
”As we enter a new era, we're thrilled to announce that we're now open for business and eager to help new bike brands develop their electric lineups. While we'll continue our valued collaboration with Rocky Mountain, our exclusive partnership has evolved to this exciting new stage.”
The information available was on the site was vague but what lead me to the conclusion of being the same company is that Dyname and Rocky...
The information available was on the site was vague but what lead me to the conclusion of being the same company is that Dyname and Rocky share the same address in Quebec. Too bad the old version of Dyname’s website is gone.
The entire company structure was available in the Rocky Mountain bankruptcy filings. We're nerds here, I know. I'll refrain from saying more because we already have the "will more companies be shutting down in the next 12-24 months thread" which is actually "Bike business discussion thread" or "lessons in bike company finance and valuation with Jeff", and I'm afraid someone will link that thread to tell me to stop discussing such things in the tech rumour thread.
Yeah that doesn't sound like a great idea at all, the strength increase of superboost is negligible and you are better off with a slightly beefier rim if you need that. Frames do not like being kept in a stressed state like that and won't be good for the frame or the bearings
again, what does it matter if the whole field loses stack height? no one has answered this question. we trade watts for rollover if the field finds 32 to be advantageous enough. people are talking like they have ran the tests but it simply comes down to the efficiency of the larger wheel vs power lost through geo changes. obviously this will be course and rider dependent but saying "less power in that position" doesn't account for the rest of the equation. and "fit" in terms of rider preference of what feels nice, well those XC bikes aint ergo so I think that some stack won't kill anyone.
edit: well shoot, just realized that if 32 is an advantage, and a taller rider is able to run the 32 without a significant loss of power, that could really suck for a shorter rider who isn't able to put out the watts in a 32 cockpit. we might turn XC into the NBA lol.
edit again: just imagining the arms race continuing with teams getting taller and taller riders to ride bigger and bigger bikes until we get to 36ers (finally!)
Weirdest thing about it? Wheel goes in there like it’s a perfect fit. Previous and current generation Sight FWIW.
And for the record, he doesn’t tell people to do this.
Mondraker team continues here in Andorra testing the prototype...
I've been fretting over stuffing a Frankenstein'd wheel with 150mm spacing into a standard boost frame for the past week. Between having a bright, trustworthy industry individual tell me not to sweat +/-1(or 2) mm at the axle, and reading your comments, I feel not so worried 🤣🤣🤣
150 mm and 157 mm hubs are not the same, the hub endcap to rotor and cassette spacing is different.
This is not the case for 148 and 157 hubs, in that case only the middle of the hub is wider (same width as a 150 mm hub).
https://www.redkitecycles.co.uk/product/trek-fuel-ex-9-8-eagle-90-gen-7/
8th August For the Trek embargo.
I cant see to find any info on the longer travel version?
sick paint, well done Trek for once, love to see a good seat, new grips, proper tyres, a proper Raceface Era handlebar instead of that stupid one piece carbon cockpit that kills your hand with stiffness, impressed
https://ciclismo.calmera.es/doble-suspension/6353-trek-fuel-mx-9-xt-gen-7--26-197216271260.html?srsltid=AfmBOopvQHejNg4yBSxAipEarSfwCuNItmSZqOT3Xqsy_08hRg33tL7k mullet 150/160
LX https://ciclismo.calmera.es/doble-suspension/6274-trek-fuel-lx-99-x0-axs-gen-7--26-197216198895.html 170/160 full 29,
the Fuel + seems to follow the same scheme, 145/150 EX, MX 150/160 and LX 160/170
https://ciclismo.calmera.es/emtb-dobles/6286-trek-fuel-ex-8-gen-2--26-197216203650.html
https://ciclismo.calmera.es/emtb-dobles/6364-trek-fuel-lx-98-xt-gen-2--26-197216272793.html the LX seems to be a great light ebike option, not sure on the battery as there's no info but it's TQ HPR60
from this other site
https://www.redkitecycles.co.uk/product/trek-fuel-ex-9-7-gen-2/
580 battery, nice
It doesn't seem like they're doing a very good job with this embargo.
Fuel+
Dumb name, if you can't put the name in the URL of your webpage tReK you've goofed.
Slash+ should of been Slash-e, it sounds like Slashy, you took that from us trek, you took that from me 🥺
I think the complaint people will bring up would be the chainstays being the same size in all the sizes and different travels, although I haven't found a geo chart for the LX yet so maybe they might be different but I would be surprised. Don't really know enough about geo to know if that's actually a problem but I do like the other adjustability options, e.g the headset cups, interchangeable rocker links to adjust travel, progression flip chip for the shock.
The travel adjusts by changing the rocker links out and changing the stroke length of the shock, e.g the EX is 205x60, LX and MX are 205x65mm. Looks like they have made the rocker links pretty easy to manufacture as well being a two piece design which generally would be easier to make two flatter parts compared to a one piece rocker which usually requires more machine time. Downside is usually stiffness but Trek uses the two piece design on the rest of their bikes and they seem to hold up well. I imagine it requires a bit more engineering work going into the frame to make sure it can take the loads through that area.
Solid update over the prior models. Should be a compelling option for people starting out who aren't quite sure what type of riding they want to be doing or for people who want a bike that suits their local terrain but can easily be changed up to go bigger for bike park use.
i hope there will be a rockshox version of the LT. if so BUUUUY!
(too lazy to faff around with shock/fork swap haha)
Trek leveraging their size and capacity to cut manufacturing costs whilst still charging premium prices.
I’ve got a spare straight Flow EX 29 hanging on the wall just in case. Spokes were toast and a friend needed a 100 front hub for cheap.
I wonder if trek catches wind of this thread and contacts the powers that be here..
blog post with the embargo went up on the 10th only, bikes appeared way before that with no instructions on any embargo
Boo this man.
Well, the last time they tried to do a huge launch - where they properly kept everything under wraps on the dealer side, put a countdown on the website, and said something along the lines of "the biggest innovation in bikes since carbon fiber".... it turned out to be wavecell.
So maybe they're just happy soft launching dealer side and then doing a proper launch a bit later without too much fuss.
If I were in that meeting I'd have suggested the electric versions of our existing range got an "ER" designation for "enhanced ride" or "extended range," then you'd have the SlashER, FuelER, and SessionER. Kinda falls apart for the SupercaliberER, however. 😂
I mentioned it in the Powerplay SL review, but Dyname, Rocky Mountain’s in house motor company, is seeking to get involved with additional bike companies.
”As we enter a new era, we're thrilled to announce that we're now open for business and eager to help new bike brands develop their electric lineups. While we'll continue our valued collaboration with Rocky Mountain, our exclusive partnership has evolved to this exciting new stage.”
https://www.dyname.ca
They aren't in house. They used to share an ownership group, and now they don't.
I get it the confusion they're both owned by Quebecois but they don't all look the same.
The information available was on the site was vague but what lead me to the conclusion of being the same company is that Dyname and Rocky share the same address in Quebec. Too bad the old version of Dyname’s website is gone.
Funny thing is that they are a private owned company. They can't even blame 'market pressure' for every sh1tty penny pinching anti competition decision they make.
It's just Dick Burke being a douch canoe.
Full disclosure.....I chuffin' haaate Trek.
The entire company structure was available in the Rocky Mountain bankruptcy filings. We're nerds here, I know. I'll refrain from saying more because we already have the "will more companies be shutting down in the next 12-24 months thread" which is actually "Bike business discussion thread" or "lessons in bike company finance and valuation with Jeff", and I'm afraid someone will link that thread to tell me to stop discussing such things in the tech rumour thread.
No word about Trek using maxxis tires on the stock fotos? No more Bontrager tires?