>>2000927This is an interesting and common sort of /n/post
You first bring up high end and esoteric technology, direct mount derailers:
https://www.pinkbike.com/news/a-brief-history-of-direct-mount-derailleurs.htmlI really don't know much about these, but the idea seems to be to add stiffness which will give more precise shifting, and now they're being widely adopted alongside different axle standards. Is there really such a difference between this 'direct mount' piece which is not even integral to the frame, and a derailer hanger? It's almost just semantics.
Now, THIS, is an interesting discussion.
But you want to have it through the lense of your nonspecific project, where you intend to modify a bike to be something which it is not (almost always a terrible idea).
The truth comes out:
>nah, got a chink adapter , insteadWhat you're actually going to do is default to 70s poverty technology, which, diametrically opposite to direct mount (intended to give increased stiffness and precise shifting), is instead going to give a 5 cent piece of stamped steel which flexes like crazy and incredibly annoying wheel installs. This is actually a realm where /n/ could help you or be interested in you actually posting you project, but you bought the whole thing up way out the other side of bike mechanics, for no real reason other than to pretend what you're doing is flash and confuse people.
Someone did even post a superior version of what you're doing:
>>2000939The nicer adapters from the fixie regret era, but i'm 95% certain that the ~$30 cost would be way beyond your budget, which is why you originally brought up $200 derailers.
