11:20!
It seems like at least according to the video just posted by Linus Tech Tips, Framework is planning to release a first party dual m.2 enclosure for the Expansion Bay Modules!
Link to the Video:
4 Likes
I was here looking for information on that, I can’t believe they would let him tease it like that and not drop it. Nothing on the store either 
1 Like
Time link (11 min 14 sec): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GS35VHEfFDU&t=11m14s
Transcript time link: https://youtubetranscript.com/?v=GS35VHEfFDU&t=674
Transcript
they’re packing up
framework dual m.2 SSD carriers. This
first station is flashing firmware then
the serial number of the board gets
paired with the QR code on the sticker
for the packaging then it gets bagged,
boxed, boxed into a bigger master carton
box
Hi,
I think a 3rd party already makes a dual nvme bay for the fw16.
He also makes the oculink expansion bay.
Search the oculink thread for details.
Josh_Cook has quite a number of Framework-related projects, but he hasn’t shipped anything yet.
he’s shipped a few donglehider+ expansion cards plus at the end of the day he’s only a teenager
1 Like
SMH… these only go up to 2280. 
OTOH:
what’s the market share of 2280 & smaller drives in 9’s. 3 nines? 5 nines? IDK but it’s HIGH. It stretches credulity to believe that a company like FW would be wise to support such a product. I mean it could happen, but if your use case is so justified by a niche-of-a-niche then rolling your own longer board is probably lot more reasonable expectation.
Separately, framework we’re waiting! 
Do you have a sale date?
What height for M.2 SSDs will be available in the “Expansion Bay Shell”?
Could a small radiator like the one on the Samsung 990 Pro SSD with standard PCI-SIG D8 (8.8mm) be placed inside and take advantage of the airflow from the fans?
I can’t speak authoritatively on the technical feasibility of supporting another 3 centimeters of length of M.2, but it can be done. I’d wager very little prevents it from being done if a one-person project already has the know-how to do so. The effort reads less like “oh I had to deliberately bend over backwards to leave 110 mm of space” and more like “hey it coincidentally leaves room for 110 mm, and oh I only need to add a standoff to let people use that space.” Doesn’t sound like the support cost would be adding another zero, and more like a rounding error.
Can you provide a link to this video please?