T47
12-29-15, 11:20 PM
#9
:)
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 3,420
Bikes: Cannondale CAAD12, Specialized Rockhopper, Norco Fluid FS1
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 127 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
To be honest, I'm up for this. Threaded bottom bracket, 30mm spindle, best of both worlds.
12-30-15, 01:44 AM
#10
A little North of Hell
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,892
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 71 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
T47
Not just them.
Industry launches new, larger threaded T47 bottom bracket standard ? say goodbye to PressFit!
First Look: T47 Bottom Bracket Standard | Bicycling
Argonaut and Chris King aim to slay PF30 with new threaded BB - VeloNews.com
Industry launches new, larger threaded T47 bottom bracket standard ? say goodbye to PressFit!
First Look: T47 Bottom Bracket Standard | Bicycling
Argonaut and Chris King aim to slay PF30 with new threaded BB - VeloNews.com
Last edited by Soil_Sampler; 12-30-15 at 01:56 AM. Reason: pic
12-30-15, 11:31 PM
#11
Clark W. Griswold
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: ,location, location
Posts: 13,458
Bikes: Foundry Chilkoot Ti W/Ultegra Di2, Salsa Timberjack Ti, Cinelli Mash Work RandoCross Fun Time Machine, 1x9 XT Parts Hybrid, Co-Motion Cascadia, Specialized Langster, Phil Wood Apple VeloXS Frame (w/DA 7400), R+M Supercharger2 Rohloff, Habanero Ti 26
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4330 Post(s)
Liked 3,954 Times
in
2,643 Posts
This is awesome. I mean I hope not to own a bike that requires such ridiculousness to mount a good ole' square taper but I am glad it exists and maybe it will be pursued and likely it won't but it will be better than the press fit and bbbbbbbbbb 1million billon shiz various companies are crapping out.
Square taper forever, bullsheet never!
Square taper forever, bullsheet never!
12-30-15, 11:56 PM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: BANNED.
Posts: 3,899
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 443 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
7 Posts
yeah...but they weren't the first to do that. I'm responding to him saying that surly spits out new frame standards every week.
12-31-15, 12:01 AM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: PHL
Posts: 9,948
Bikes: Litespeed Catalyst, IRO Rob Roy, All City Big Block
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1332 Post(s)
Liked 398 Times
in
194 Posts
Guess I haven't been keeping up. I've just been imagining them as a bunch of guys in a factory drinking whiskey and seeing who can make the widest frame.
12-31-15, 12:05 AM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: BANNED.
Posts: 3,899
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 443 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times
in
7 Posts
I'm not 100% sure but I THINK salsa was the first to use the 170/177mm rear end. same parent company, but different philosophies.
12-31-15, 06:50 AM
#17
canis lupus familiaris
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,254
Bikes: En plus one
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
My son and have fatbikes we purchased within months of each other. Mine is 150 F / 190 R and his is 135F / 170R. No interchangeability at all.
Ours have QR hubs, the newer stuff is Thru axle.
I read some new bike specs listed as 197 R.
Ours have QR hubs, the newer stuff is Thru axle.
I read some new bike specs listed as 197 R.
12-31-15, 09:12 AM
#18
Brown Jersey Winner
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: The Bad Woods.
Posts: 8,797
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 243 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
13 Posts
177/197 hubs just mean thru axle, a 135mm hub with thruaxle is a 12x142 which is the norm for most "regular" mtbs these days
most qr hubs can be converted by just changing the endcaps to mate up with the rear triangle
the hubs got wider so they could build symmetrical frames with more clearance and still enable you to use a double ring
"boost" hubs are a whole other bag of bull**** that i dont really think is necessary
most qr hubs can be converted by just changing the endcaps to mate up with the rear triangle
the hubs got wider so they could build symmetrical frames with more clearance and still enable you to use a double ring
"boost" hubs are a whole other bag of bull**** that i dont really think is necessary
12-31-15, 10:28 AM
#19
Not actually Tmonk
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 14,082
Bikes: road, track, mtb
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2602 Post(s)
Liked 3,107 Times
in
1,642 Posts
I don't even pay attention to all this crap...
As long as they still make race bikes in regular english threaded BB then I'll continue to ignore these new bb stds
As long as they still make race bikes in regular english threaded BB then I'll continue to ignore these new bb stds
__________________
"Your beauty is an aeroplane;
so high, my heart cannot bear the strain." -A.C. Jobim, Triste
"Your beauty is an aeroplane;
so high, my heart cannot bear the strain." -A.C. Jobim, Triste
12-31-15, 11:01 AM
#20
canis lupus familiaris
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,254
Bikes: En plus one
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I knew mine could be converted to thru axle with different end caps, but the size difference is confusing. I never actually measured the frame spacing on either bike.
12-31-15, 01:40 PM
#22
canis lupus familiaris
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,254
Bikes: En plus one
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I'm not complaining, all these changes are just fodder for us nerds.
12-31-15, 01:49 PM
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: SD
Posts: 2,745
Bikes: Handsome Fredward, Trek 1.1
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 481 Post(s)
Liked 131 Times
in
47 Posts
To Surly's credit, at least they have somewhat legit reasons for the changes they make and it seems like most of their new fat/mtn frames have modular dropouts so you can do whatever the hell you want with them to a degree. When they started making the Pugs their reasoning was to be able to use a stock MTB hub and engineered around it. Now that fat bikes have matured, I can't argue that wider hubs and BB's are a bad idea. Whenever I see an asymmetric Pugs frame with all the spokes on one side of a 60mm rim it strikes me as weird.
Last edited by 50voltphantom; 12-31-15 at 01:50 PM. Reason: spelling
12-31-15, 02:54 PM
#24
canis lupus familiaris
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,254
Bikes: En plus one
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
To Surly's credit, at least they have somewhat legit reasons for the changes they make and it seems like most of their new fat/mtn frames have modular dropouts so you can do whatever the hell you want with them to a degree. When they started making the Pugs their reasoning was to be able to use a stock MTB hub and engineered around it. Now that fat bikes have matured, I can't argue that wider hubs and BB's are a bad idea. Whenever I see an asymmetric Pugs frame with all the spokes on one side of a 60mm rim it strikes me as weird.
Another design criteria for the Pugs, was to have interchangeable wheels front and back. Apparently for extreme competitions like Iditarod, if your freehub failed, you could swap wheels. This would keep you from being stranded in what could potentially be a life or death situation.
I considered a Surly ICT when I bought my Lurch, (very similar frames with slightly different geometry). Ultimately it was price and wanting to avoid a press fit BB that steered me towards the Lurch.
