Jump to content

Introducing the new kid on the block: Trek Roscoe


News bot

Recommended Posts

Is anyone else wandering what this Boost141 thing is? You could probably fit a non-boost 142 hub in there, right? With the rear stays stretched apart by only 1mm, things shoud still be pretty parallel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boost141 is basically the QR version of boost148. 

 

They've added 6mm to the traditional 10mmx135mm hub (remember: Boost148 is traditional 142+6mm). 

 

So, a thru-axle 142 isn't going to work here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is anyone else wandering what this Boost141 thing is? You could probably fit a non-boost 142 hub in there, right? With the rear stays stretched apart by only 1mm, things shoud still be pretty parallel.

Boost141 is essentially Boost spacing for quick release dropouts so a 142 TA hub wouldn't be compatible.

 

A standard QR rear hub is 135x10mm, plus the 6mm for boost gets you to 141mm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure the idea of the "ho hum" fork is to keep the cost down....? Fit a Reba on there and all of a sudden the RRP shoots up, then one may moan about the high price for an ALU hardtail...

 

Boost 141 is technically a Boost 148 hub with QR end caps... so a 142 hub will not work as the spacing to the disc would be out (as well as for the cassette) remember that boost also spreads the flanges of the hubs apart - not just a longer axle...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame about the ho-hum fork. 

 

The could've specced a M6000 Deore 10spd drivetrain and spared a few bucks and slapped on a Reba, the Judy Gold or even the new Rev. 

Agreed on all counts. If you look at the Vitus hard tail range on CRC you see better value and even better geo numbers. This isn't bad value though especially with a dropper post but I'd rather have the decent fork and add a cheap dropper later if I had the choice. I thing on a hard tail like this a decent fork is pretty important...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A step in the right direction - a semi-affordable HT that's not out-and-out XC. And that fork isn't terrible, it's just heavy.

 

Minus points for lack of upgrade path with the axle spacing though. It grates me when manufacturers invent new standards just so you have to just keep buying new bikes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minus points for lack of upgrade path with the axle spacing though. It grates me when manufacturers invent new standards just so you have to just keep buying new bikes.

 

If you don't like my standards, that's ok; I have others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minus points for lack of upgrade path with the axle spacing though. It grates me when manufacturers invent new standards just so you have to just keep buying new bikes.

From what I have read Trek weren't the first with this - the likes of Specialized etc were - Trek followed suit. As for upgrade-ability, like I said a boost hub with QR end caps should work - granted there are not going to be multiple options out there just yet but give it a month...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These types of bikes are so much fun. I built up a Cotic Solaris with a heavy duty fork, plus wheels, and dropper. It's chuckable, climbs well, descends like a demon, and best of all - no pivot bearing services needed. I am now using this bike for 70% of my rides in an effort to save some money on servicing the dual suspension bike.

 

Glad to see that there are more and more trail hard tails available to the public. Previously you could only have a dual suspension trail bike, since the only hard tail options available were out and out XC oriented. For most people, especially people getting into mtb without a monster of a budget, these bikes just make so much sense. Reminds me of the good old days when bikes were uncomplicated and just plain old fun.

 

Pity about the spacing though, another standard is just unnecessary. Why not just use standard boost spacing with TA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pity about the spacing though, another standard is just unnecessary. Why not just use standard boost spacing with TA?

Pretty sure that comes back down to cost...a TA costs more to produce, needs specific dropouts that requires additional machining etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Settings My Forum Content My Followed Content Forum Settings Ad Messages My Ads My Favourites My Saved Alerts My Pay Deals Help Logout