29 ultra trail and boost....- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    260

    29 ultra trail and boost....

    Was thinking of having a ultra trail 29" made to accept the boost standard.
    Not sure its needed but a little extra stiffness on the big wheels seems like a good thing. This will b my first 29" bike and the thought was since i'm starting from scratch maybe i should include the boost standard now.
    They make the pike fork in 29 boost and some wheel company's like i9 are making great wheel sets and i can get XT cranks in boost until they make it in XTR.
    In the reading i have done it seems to get mixed reviews with both sides making great points but im still on the fence. Any thoughts would b appreciated. Any other shaver 29" inch riders that would like to share ride reports would also be helpful as the ones i have read so far have all been very positive but i would welcome more feed back.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,792
    I test rode a medium for 2 days and noticed no flex, unlike my Tracer 29.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,046
    No clue on FOES, but don't mind the marketing BS about needing "Boost Specific" cranks, it's utter Horse Shite, any normal crank will work just fine. I run a 150 x 12 on my 29er Phantom and run a normal 9spd XT M760 crankset setup as a 2x with bash in the big ring position, chainline is about as perfect as it gets to me.

    As to the actual Boost drop outs, I'd say yes or go with 150 x 12, always nice to have the wider flanges to build a less dished wheel, that's why I went to 150 x 12 after running a Trials/SS hub with 6 cogs for about 6 years on my 29ers, now I get to run a full cassette, and have an almost dishless wheel.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    260
    So you think the XTR trail 2x10 cranks will work and have an acceptable chain line?
    Curious on your thoughts, as from what I read on 2x or 3x it needs to be 3mm wider to match the wider rear spacing. If it works well I'd rather have the XTR.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    260
    Quote Originally Posted by slowrider View Post
    I test rode a medium for 2 days and noticed no flex, unlike my Tracer 29.
    In the frame or wheels? I know on my FXR the frame is stiff but wondered about the wheels for a 5 1/2 travel 29er.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,046
    Can't really tell you for sure, all I can tell you is I have a Banshee Phantom running a 150x12 rear with 73mm BB and a Shimano M760 XT triple crank as a 2x setup with a bash where the big ring should be. I have no issues running this setup, absolutely perfect for me, chainline seems so good. Only thing I see as an issue is the 2x specific cranks normally have a lesser chainline, i.e the rings are actually closer in compared to a conventional triple, so if it were me I'd opt for a triple and do a bash - that's what I've done with the lower end Deores on my loaner/rental bikes, tried both 2x and 3x with bash and prefer the 3x with bash.

    Quote Originally Posted by fxr man View Post
    So you think the XTR trail 2x10 cranks will work and have an acceptable chain line?
    Curious on your thoughts, as from what I read on 2x or 3x it needs to be 3mm wider to match the wider rear spacing. If it works well I'd rather have the XTR.
    My setup. Camera wasn't on a tripod, but think it shows the chainline and how good it is in middle/Big.
    29 ultra trail and boost....-150mm-rear.jpg
    29 ultra trail and boost....-dscn0083_1024.jpg
    29 ultra trail and boost....-dscn0063_1024.jpg
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    260
    Thanks LyNx I'll see if that can work for me as well and I appreciate your reply. One more question for u. If they need 6 mm wider in the rear drop outs for boost and your running 150mm for a total of 8 mm wider then 12x142 then I was curious about heel strikes as that's one of the concerns with boost. What's your experience?
    Last edited by fxr man; 10-08-2015 at 09:47 PM. Reason: Misspelled

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flamingtaco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,451
    Heal strikes is a subjective question that depends upon how much heel in, heel out, or neutral your feet sit. Are you more likely to suffer heal strikes with a wider hub? Always. Will you ever heel strike? Depends upon your body and where you set your feet on the pedals.

    I have wide feet and run pedal extenders to provide about 1" clearance between shoe and crank arm. I never strike the crank arm, but must adjust my feet to the edge of comfort to keep from striking the chainstay, and that's with just a 135mm rear end.

    XT cranks are so very ood. XTR isn't worth the spending unless you are shooting for race weight.
    I will suffer no butt-hurt fools!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,046
    Actually your math is off, 142 x 12 is actually 135mm spacing with 3mm on each side to fit the slots, so a 150mm rear is 15mm wider since it sits flush to the drop out, to have the same as 142 you need 157. This is what a lot of people don't seem to get, 142 x 12 was just a BS something to make stuff obsolete and sell more stuff, BOOST 148 is actually a legit improvement, that is actually 142mm wide without the extra to fit in the slots.

    As to heal strikes, no I don't notice a great amount, but of course in tech sections where you're pivoting on the ball of your foot and normal foot angle changes. I have size 13/48 feet, walk with toes out some and on the PreProduction Prime I have, I had to get accustomed to like Taco said, pedaling on the edge of my natural position, production frames brought the curve in a bit and further back/closer to the drop outs.

    Quote Originally Posted by fxr man View Post
    Thanks LyNx I'll see if that can work for me as well and I appreciate your reply. One more question for u. If they need 6 mm wider in the rear drop outs for boost and your running 150mm for a total of 8 mm wider then 12x142 then I was curious about heel strikes as that's one of the concerns with boost. What's your experience?
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    260
    LyNx and Flamingtaco, I really appreciate the time you took to respond. The information is very helpful and reminds me of what a great resource this site is when people like yourselves chime in with very well said opinions, experience and points of view. Flamingtaco I had not taken the time to consider what you said about the heel strikes and it makes perfect sense and gives me something to look at and consider. LyNx, your right my math was incorrect as I didn't know that about the hub widths especially in the detail you explained.
    So I'm going for boost and will look at standard cranksets in XT and XTR and XT with boost and go with the best fit and price. Barbados could b my next vacation...:-).

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,792
    No flex at all in any aspect of the entire bike.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    260
    That's good to hear. Still thinking 29er but also now looking at the mixer trail.
    Cant wait to hear some ride reports.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,792
    I'm more interested in the Alpine!
    Quote Originally Posted by fxr man View Post
    That's good to hear. Still thinking 29er but also now looking at the mixer trail.
    Cant wait to hear some ride reports.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    260
    whats the alpine...?

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: slowrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,792
    Quote Originally Posted by fxr man View Post
    whats the alpine...?
    The new Foes 275+, Shorter than Foes 29r stays, nearly 29r rollover with more footprint.

Similar Threads

  1. 26 with boost?
    By clbaumer in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-16-2015, 08:03 PM
  2. Big Bear Lake Ultra & Ultra Lite (WV) - August 1, 2015
    By BigBearLake - WV in forum Endurance XC Racing
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-09-2015, 04:48 AM
  3. What's The Big Bear Lake Ultra trail like?
    By fueledbymetal in forum Virginia, WV, Maryland, DC, Delaware
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-08-2015, 03:42 PM
  4. 26 and 148 Boost?
    By ehigh in forum 26er Bikes
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-30-2015, 01:57 PM
  5. VO2 BOOST**anyone try this yet??
    By iwantalitebike in forum Nutrition and Hydration
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 07-13-2011, 08:47 AM

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.