# Thudbuster - short or long travel?



## mwcet8k (Jun 17, 2004)

I've recently recruited a friend into serious MTB'ing. He has a new GF Paragon. Great bike, except that after two longish rides this weekend he feels a little sore...in all the wrong places. Not good.

So I've told him to pick up a Thudbuster to prevent that fresh-out-of-prison feeling. Do you guys recommend the short or long travel version for a 29er hardtail?


----------



## stratmosphere (May 22, 2007)

Used an ST on a Superfly. Worked great. P


----------



## boomn (Jul 6, 2007)

mwcet8k said:


> I've recently recruited a friend into serious MTB'ing. He has a new GF Paragon. Great bike, except that after two longish rides this weekend he feels a little sore...in all the wrong places. Not good.
> 
> So I've told him to pick up a Thudbuster to prevent that fresh-out-of-prison feeling. Do you guys recommend the short or long travel version for a 29er hardtail?


Unfortunately it will probably still hurt his butt just as much. That money is probably better spent towards good shorts and making sure he has the right size and shape saddle for this butt. If he already has those then he likely just needs more time for his posterior to adapt to sitting on a saddle and some tips from an experienced to stand up, hover over the saddle, or at least lift his weight off the saddle over bumpy stuff that will bash the saddle against his still sensitive backside. New bikers are almost guaranteed to have pain there


----------



## hygieneboy (May 25, 2009)

The long travel one feels like you're on a bouncy diving board so I sold the one I had. I also had the Tamer Pivot plus and it was better but far from good.


----------



## nitrousjunky (May 12, 2006)

*ST for sure*

I've used both and the LT is junk compared to the ST (in my opinion). The ST take the edge off without feeling it move, the LT feels like your sitting on the end of a diving board.

I agree with boomn, make sure he has a good saddle and shorts too.


----------



## rydbyk (Oct 13, 2009)

*St*

I love the ST. I would love to see that post in a much lighter version. They would make tons of money on a lighter one for sure!


----------



## LUNARFX (Apr 20, 2009)

I had the LT just to see what the fuss was about, but one thing no one ever told me was how much heavier it is(even for someone who isn't much of a weight weenie). Like everyone said, it was like I was on the edge of a diving board. It does absorb well, but it also recoils you like Evil Knievel on a ramp.

Like mentioned, learning how to hover above the saddle, and also wearing the proper shorts, can help tremendously at a fraction of the cost. If he buys one regardless, then remind him to make sure he has the correct insert application for his weight.


----------



## socal_jack (Dec 30, 2008)

Once you get the right bumper setup and pre-load on the LT it shouldn't pogo or bounce excessively unless you're just too heavy for it period (I think the limit was 250#). I'm around 210# and the LT works fine on my GT Peace 9r, takes the edge off bumps pedaling uphill and it's barely perceptible. If you're sitting on it going downhill maybe you'll bounce, but then ....

The one other condition where it will bounce is if your pedaling style/cadence is not smooth, but it actually provides a feedback in some respects to untrain you from bad form.

Chose the LT after reading the reviews on MTBR


----------



## jimx200 (Oct 13, 2009)

*Lt*

I just installed the LT version on my hardtail..love it...works very well. As posted above, make sure you have the right bumpers in place. I do not get any bounce or dive board effect. This thing is great and really helps take the edge off the roots, ruts, and babyheads.

Weight? Only wweenies worry...probably less then a half filled water bottle. Picked mine up for $121. at Tree Fort bikes...Jenson will price match too.


----------



## indyfab25 (Feb 10, 2004)

Pm me if you are interested in an LT. I have one new in box that I am selling for a friend.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

LT,

It is one of the top reviewed products on MTBR and lots of users. For the e-riders it is a no no like handlebars above your seat, carbon fiber spacers on ti bikes, aluminum attachments on ti bikes etc.


----------



## BruceBrown (Jan 16, 2004)

mwcet8k said:


> I've recently recruited a friend into serious MTB'ing. He has a new GF Paragon. Great bike, except that after two longish rides this weekend he feels a little sore...in all the wrong places. Not good.
> 
> So I've told him to pick up a Thudbuster to prevent that fresh-out-of-prison feeling. Do you guys recommend the short or long travel version for a 29er hardtail?


Check out the Thudbuster Blog as there is a testimonial post that talks about the differences between the two that a rider who has both models addresses quite well.

BB


----------



## Steve_N (Sep 6, 2005)

mwcet8k said:


> I've recently recruited a friend into serious MTB'ing. He has a new GF Paragon. Great bike, except that after two longish rides this weekend he feels a little sore...in all the wrong places. Not good.
> 
> So I've told him to pick up a Thudbuster to prevent that fresh-out-of-prison feeling. Do you guys recommend the short or long travel version for a 29er hardtail?


I'd recommend a new saddle first and some more saddle time before going to a thudbuster, like others have suggested. It might be that the stock saddle on the GF is the wrong width or shape.

If after getting a new (proper fitting) saddle and getting a decent pair of knicks (yes they make a difference!), maybe look at a thuddie. That said, I've got an LT and love it. Use it on and off road on my Soma and has been great. Set up for your weight correctly it's a very useful piece of kit...


----------



## NCtrailX (Feb 26, 2004)

I've had both. Pick up the LT and run it a little firm. You'll get travel like the ST but will get more when you hit something hard.


----------



## Amnesia (Apr 8, 2006)

boomn said:


> Unfortunately it will probably still hurt his butt just as much. That money is probably better spent towards good shorts and making sure he has the right size and shape saddle for this butt. If he already has those then he likely just needs more time for his posterior to adapt to sitting on a saddle and some tips from an experienced to stand up, hover over the saddle, or at least lift his weight off the saddle over bumpy stuff that will bash the saddle against his still sensitive backside. New bikers are almost guaranteed to have pain there


I agree with this, the Thudbuster is a crutch for proper technique and a proper fitting saddle.


----------



## boomn (Jul 6, 2007)

Amnesia said:


> I agree with this, the Thudbuster is a crutch for proper technique and a proper fitting saddle.


I do like that you agree with me However, I wasn't trying to say that the Thudbuster couldn't have its place after the other stuff is sorted out. That didn't sound like the case in the OP's situation


----------



## Amnesia (Apr 8, 2006)

Surely there is a place for the Thudbuster, I guess I shouldn't make sweeping generalizations like that. It's definitely important to sort everything else related before resorting to one though. I guess I feel that way because I used one myself before I gained the experience that I have now. No offense intended toward the OP or his buddy.


----------



## M_S (Nov 18, 2007)

I'm not saying thudbusters were bad, they certainly can be useful, but I think in this case there are other things I would try first, starting with technique. The OP mentions that her friend is new to riding. I have noticed that many beginners stay seated far too much, perhaps for the sense of security or to reduce fatigue. I do not know if this is the case for the person in mention, but it is worth considering.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

Amnesia said:


> Surely there is a place for the Thudbuster, I guess I shouldn't make sweeping generalizations like that. It's definitely important to sort everything else related before resorting to one though. I guess I feel that way because I used one myself before I gained the experience that I have now. No offense intended toward the OP or his buddy.


Well with your earlier train of thought, then full suspension, disc brakes or even bikes in general are crutches too? And only real men go barefoot through the desert too?


----------



## Amnesia (Apr 8, 2006)

richwolf said:


> Well with your earlier train of thought, then full suspension, disc brakes or even bikes in general are crutches too? And only real men go barefoot through the desert too?


Damn right! I ride a coaster brake, rigid, 26" bike with flat non-sweep handlebars! And a really long stem!:thumbsup:


----------



## 29Inches (Apr 11, 2005)

*hummmmm????*



Amnesia said:


> Surely there is a place for the Thudbuster, I guess I shouldn't make sweeping generalizations like that. It's definitely important to sort everything else related before resorting to one though. I guess I feel that way because I used one myself before I gained the experience that I have now. No offense intended toward the OP or his buddy.


_I guess I feel that way because I used one myself before I gained the experience that I have now. _

What kind of experience do you have?


----------



## Amnesia (Apr 8, 2006)

Well, it appears I've somehow opened a can of worms. 

Now I've been riding for 11 years, and learned as others have stated, that new riders tend to remain seated far too often and don't understand the benefit a proper fitting saddle can have. I ride with Specialized Phenom SL saddles(130mm width) on all of my bikes now, because they fit ME. I also learned much earlier in my 11 year riding career that it IS necessary to stand up in many places on the trail, whether it be for comfort or efficiency. Thus, purchasing a Thudbuster many years back, trying it, and not liking the other issues introduced when talking about a suspension seatpost has led me to believe that it is not the first solution for an aching rear end.


----------



## mwcet8k (Jun 17, 2004)

Wow, never thought my post would open a can of worms like this. Thanks all for responding. To be honest, I think my friend just needs some more saddle time to build up toughness in that area. But I'll have him look at a new saddle before any other piece of hardware. I'll have him to go to a Specialized shop so they can use that sit bone measurement thing to determine the width of the saddle he should have.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

Amnesia said:


> Well, it appears I've somehow opened a can of worms.
> 
> Now I've been riding for 11 years, and learned as others have stated, that new riders tend to remain seated far too often and don't understand the benefit a proper fitting saddle can have. I ride with Specialized Phenom SL saddles(130mm width) on all of my bikes now, because they fit ME. I also learned much earlier in my 11 year riding career that it IS necessary to stand up in many places on the trail, whether it be for comfort or efficiency. Thus, purchasing a Thudbuster many years back, trying it, and not liking the other issues introduced when talking about a suspension seatpost has led me to believe that it is not the first solution for an aching rear end.[/QUOTE
> 
> ...


----------



## LUNARFX (Apr 20, 2009)

richwolf said:


> I concur that the thudbuster is not for everyone but to dismiss it and say it is not efficient for a lot of situations or people is just trying to paint with too broad of brush.
> Looks at the reviews and the ratings on this web site. I don't think all those people are fooling themselves.


I definitely agree, and I think the thread turned into a "why and which Thudbuster is good/bad for you" in general, instead of focusing on helping mwcet8k friend's sore areas after some fun rides. I didn't want to be misunderstood myself, and still like the LT version to support all the great reviews of MTBR. It just doesn't suit me for the type of riding I do, and also when on the trail, I've substituted the value of a Thudbuster with a proper seat, ride technique, and apparel.


----------



## Amnesia (Apr 8, 2006)

richwolf said:


> Amnesia said:
> 
> 
> > Well, it appears I've somehow opened a can of worms.
> ...


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

Amnesia said:


> richwolf said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Amnesia (Apr 8, 2006)

richwolf said:


> Amnesia said:
> 
> 
> > Again a broad brush. Some people have hard tails because they like them better than FS for a number of reasons. Simplicity, less maintenance, lighter, more efficient in many situations particularly climbing out of the saddle. Also there is a big price difference between a quality hard tail and a FS bike.
> ...


----------



## boomn (Jul 6, 2007)

richwolf said:


> Again a broad brush. Some people have hard tails because they like them better than FS for a number of reasons. Simplicity, less maintenance, lighter, more efficient in many situations particularly climbing out of the saddle. Also there is a big price difference between a quality hard tail and a FS bike.
> Also not everyone rides the same terrrain all the time. Some rides may be smooth, some rough, some wash board, you name it.
> I have the luxury of several bikes including 2 HT, 1 FS and a Pugsley. I love the FS bike but I don't want to not have a hard tail. The TB makes many rides on the HT really nice. Sometimes I don't run it on the HT but if is a long day in the saddle with lots of bumps the TB makes is work.


I can't disagree with your points, but given the highlighted quote you are trying to prove is so wrong with those points... well it just looks like you're trying to ride high horse right over this one. Regardless of how much someone may prefer hardtails and how rough the trails they ride with a hardtail _if they can't handle what they are attempting_ (to paraphrase amnesia) then something needs to change, whether that is riding different trails, buying a different bike, buying a thuddy, etc. None of your counter examples are about buying your thuddy or FS bike because you felt beat up


----------



## Amnesia (Apr 8, 2006)

And back to the original post:

FWIW, the Thudbuster I owned was the long travel version and I realized one of my biggest gripes with it was that when seated the reach to the handlebars constantly changed as the seatpost moved throughout it's travel.

I suppose what I'm trying to point out is that sometimes we are looking at things that we may feel hinder our performance, when in reality, it is ourselves, our technique, or our overall fit to the bike that is actually the matter at hand.


----------



## yogiprophet (Jan 9, 2006)

I'm building up my first hartail ever after 15 years of riding full suspension.
I ordered the LT version for the Superfly. I thought it would be more versitile...and adjusatble. I like the fact that you can adjust the preload and if it is a little to springy, I'll just crank the preload on it...and I'm inbetween 2 elastomers so I'm going with the firmer as per sthrnfat.
It's too bad there isn't a rebound damper but that would add mass, complexity and cost. It'll be like my first mnt. bike - the Pro Flex 855 - because of the elastomers


----------



## socal_jack (Dec 30, 2008)

Another MTBR thread gone down the ego drain. The original question was simple, ST or LT ? Anything beyond that is superfluous. There is plenty of good information on setting it up correctly, if you're bouncing or if you're reach to the handlebars is changing too much (?) RTFM.


----------



## richwolf (Dec 8, 2004)

boomn said:


> I can't disagree with your points, but given the highlighted quote you are trying to prove is so wrong with those points... well it just looks like you're trying to ride high horse right over this one. Regardless of how much someone may prefer hardtails and how rough the trails they ride with a hardtail _if they can't handle what they are attempting_ (to paraphrase amnesia) then something needs to change, whether that is riding different trails, buying a different bike, buying a thuddy, etc. None of your counter examples are about buying your thuddy or FS bike because you felt beat up


Huh?


----------



## teamdicky (Jan 12, 2004)

I've had both the LT (back @ 2000) and the ST (now).

I prefer the ST for taking the edge off, and I like it. I don't ride it all the time, but when I'm feeling beat up or riding fixed gear it's simply wonderful.

The LT was great, but a little too much for what I was looking for.

MTBR disclaimer: I'm sponsored by Cane Creek, but my opinion is still valid. I don't use my Thuddie all the time since it is heavy compared to a regular post, but for the rider trying to take the edge off of a bike HE/SHE ALREADY OWNS... it's an awesome upgrade.


----------



## benwitt11 (May 1, 2005)

I love the ST on my Fargo. For long days seated in the saddle it's been 
great. Combined with a Selle Anitomico saddle it's like riding a lazy boy. I do not consider this a crutch in any way. My legs still are what ultimately determine how far and how fast I can ride. A saddle is a stupid reason to have to go home early. If it helps you ride farther and more comfortably just do it and enjoy. I'm personally wondering why it took me so long to get one, even without any problems that needed to be fixed. Had I known how much more comfortable it is after a long day's ride I would have purchased one a long time ago. I went with the ST for how I ride. I was looking for an efficient way to take the edge off of long coming bumps, not a real suspension alternative. There is some pedalling feedback, even with a smooth cadence and stroke, but I hardly notice it anymore. It wion't be going on all of my bikes, but it sure is appreciated on the Fargo and soon on the Big Dummy. 

To the posters calling it a crutch, leave your egos at the door and stop posting opinions that are not asked for. Continue riding you rigid, fixie, weight weinie bikes and stop trying to prove how big of men your are.


----------



## Guest (Dec 22, 2009)

richwolf said:


> Looks at the reviews and the ratings on this web site. I don't think all those people are fooling themselves.


Really? It is the internet after all. There's lots of examples where groupthink is wrong and review postings don't constitute an unbiased sample. It would be better to concentrate on merits than defer to "experts" whom you know nothing about.


----------



## lukeduke (Feb 6, 2004)

*tried both...*

stuck with the ST. On the 29r there is less need for the longer travel's weight, etc. I have a rigid carbon post for the bike too, but i never use it. Not a weight weenie, so that is a non issue. Takes just the right edge off the bumps. I also appreciate it because i use the bike as a short trip (2 miles) commuter to work when i am not dressed in real cycling shorts. Cane Creek should make a limited edition ti/carbon version, just for the hell of it, maybe put pink anodized bits on it?


----------



## bobbotron (Nov 28, 2007)

benwitt11 said:


> To the posters calling it a crutch, leave your egos at the door and stop posting opinions that are not asked for. Continue riding you rigid, fixie, weight weinie bikes and stop trying to prove how big of men your are.


Hear hear. This is good advice for many opinions in cycling..


----------



## 29buzz (Nov 5, 2004)

Any ST users over 220lbs? I used the LT years ago-but weighed 215! Now about 245lb-so i have wondered if it is firm enough or has stiffer elasomer sets?
Thanks 
Bz


----------



## Turveyd (Sep 30, 2007)

I had the ST, wished I'd of went LT barely feel it move but it did work and nicely and it's still in use on the HT but with a mate 3 - 4 years on so nicely durable.

Logically though its still going on a HT, so anything to rough you'll be standing up anyway so a ST should be enough.

230lb's here and didn't have the firmest elastronemer in there from vague memory so you should be fine.

Doesn't work while standing up ofcourse, the bumps while descending used to beat my knees to shreds so I went back to FS can't beat a FS really.

The first time you get off your seat get back on and the seat moves forward is abit scarey but hey.


----------



## Yogii (Jun 5, 2008)

Had the LT before the bike got stolen. It does just what it says it does.....Big Hits-Bumpy descent-get off the seat and weight the pedals. I love to mash on the flats and see then my "pedal circles" form goes....good training aid. 500% easier to get used to a Thuds nuances that clipless pedals, IMHO........


----------



## slocaus (Jul 21, 2005)

.....


----------



## DeeZee (Jan 26, 2005)

*Sun Tour*

I want to try one of these..............

http://www.srsuntour-cycling.com/SI...16c867f0/index.php?screen=sh.detail&tnid=2742


----------



## Ike Turner (Dec 20, 2006)

I have a short travel I throw on every now and again depending on the ride. It is a fine product that doesnt get enough play on here IMHO


----------



## Lugboot (Mar 12, 2008)

29buzz said:


> Any ST users over 220lbs? I used the LT years ago-but weighed 215! Now about 245lb-so i have wondered if it is firm enough or has stiffer elasomer sets?
> Thanks
> Bz


Both versions come with three levels of elastomers. Of the three included, Black is the firmest. However, there is an even firmer one that is purple, that can be obtained separately if you need it. I have an LT on my hardtail and use the black elastomers. I'm around 230 at the moment.


----------



## Schultz29 (Oct 12, 2005)

I have had both the ST and the LT. The ST is pretty light duty and one of the lever arms on mine cracked and I had to send it back. Cane Creek being the solid customer service company that they are set me up with a brand new LT. It works very well and has proven to be more durable than the ST. However, I prefer the looks, weight and shorter travel of the ST. I really just wanted something to absorb the sharp hits to my back side. The ST is all you need if that's what you're looking for. The LT feels much like a FS bike because it has so much travel. My other complaints with the LT are it's heavy weight and the long levers which make it difficult to put your bike in a stand for doing maintenance. It also kind of feels like an inverted pendulum back there when you're out of the saddle. 

Quality of these posts is pretty impressive. The machining is about as nice as a Thomson product. I almost re-installed my LT just last night but I have a Moots post as well. If I just want to take the edge off it's hard to beat a Ti post.


----------



## GlowBoy (Jan 3, 2004)

The possibly #1 or certainly at least #2 reason people buy full-boingers is to make long rides easier on their butt and back. Hardly anyone questions that and says "listen pu$$y, man up and ride a hardtail." But if you achieve the same end (so to speak) with an inexpensive and effective Thuddy, it's a crutch. GMAFB.

Agreed, it's no substitute for sorting out saddle issues, and it's no substitute for learning to ride light in the saddle over rough terrain. But we look the other way all the time when FS is used as a substitute for dealing with saddle and fit issues and learning to pick good lines and ride light. Hey, we have to justify those expensive bike purchases, you know.

The reality is that on a 30 or 40 mile ride, most riders are going to spend most of their time sitting on their butt. Certainly if you're over 30 and like doing long rides on actual trails, you'd be silly not to at least consider doing something to soften the ride a bit. A 3-4" FS has many advantages vs. a Thudbuster LT (I've drunk the Kool-Aid and ride a big-buck FS myself), but in terms of pure saddle comfort it's pretty much a wash between the two.

As for the OP's question: I'll give the classic answer: *it depends.* You haven't told us much about the terrain you're riding, how long the "long-ish" rides are, how old and/or fit your friend is. Like Shultz29 said, the ST will take the edge off bumps (maybe just a bit more than a softtail but not by a whole lot) whereas the LT will be more comparable to full suspension in plushness. From what little I can gather about your friend's situation, sounds like he's just looking to take the edge off and might be better off with the ST. Also, I would encourage him to keep riding to get "break in" his posterior and try a few different saddles.


----------



## socal_jack (Dec 30, 2008)

A little elaboration on my origina answer. When I was researching whether to go ST or LT, the main appeal of the LT over the ST was increased adjustability and travel. Both use elastomers for absolute weight compensation however the LT also allows use of a compression screw to preload the elastomer and dial it in further. At 210# (but have used it as high as 235#) I used the max stiff elastomers *and* cranked in ~3-4 turns of preload over the factory setting it's pretty stiff not plush at all like my FS but the adjustability is there for that. For most bumps it takes the edge off, for bigger stuff there's still some extra travel left but I don't get anywhere near the full travel nor is there any bouncy or pendulum action going on as some describe.


----------



## BATMANs (Feb 19, 2007)

I just had this custom built and with my bad back it's a blessing:


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

BATMANs said:


> I just had this custom built and with my bad back it's a blessing:


Woah... are those elastomeric spokes, too? 

Please reply, the suspense is killing me!


----------



## BATMANs (Feb 19, 2007)

I guess. The darn thing moves.

All I know is that this combination is plush and just soaks up the ground.......


----------



## ebineezer (Sep 6, 2007)

wtf?


----------



## Schultz29 (Oct 12, 2005)

I didn't know Raleigh did one-off customs ?. So, you're running a 5" travel suspension frame, 3" Thudbuster seatpost and a pedestrian style spring railed 1,000 gram+ saddle ?. Are you serious ?.


----------



## Turveyd (Sep 30, 2007)

I've seen that Raleign but with a coil shock normally old design but it was a surprising light girls bike that rode well.

Only 4" I thought.

To be fair the Thudbuster reacts faster than the rear suspension can, if it gets you through the day go for it


----------



## BATMANs (Feb 19, 2007)

Schultz29 said:


> I didn't know Raleigh did one-off customs ?. So, you're running a 5" travel suspension frame, 3" Thudbuster seatpost and a pedestrian style spring railed 1,000 gram+ saddle ?. Are you serious ?.


I bought the frame new from a Bike shop that had a frame laying around.

It's a 4-5" travel frame.

yes, it's extra weight. the bike weighs 32lbs.


----------



## wickerman1 (Dec 24, 2003)

BATMANs said:


> I bought the frame new from a Bike shop that had a frame laying around.
> 
> It's a 4-5" travel frame.
> 
> yes, it's extra weight. the bike weighs 32lbs.


thats pretty light...my hardtail weighs 36 lbs.


----------



## BATMANs (Feb 19, 2007)

wickerman1 said:


> thats pretty light...my hardtail weighs 36 lbs.


If I had a regular seat post, regular seats, Crank bros wheels or Mavics I would probably be in the mid-20'slbs range....


----------



## alexkraemer (Jul 30, 2007)

I got a deal on a LT and once I swapped out the elastomers (blue-blue to blue-black) the bobbing went away and I don't even notice the LT is there (except that my ass hurts less).


----------



## wickerman1 (Dec 24, 2003)

BATMANs said:


> If I had a regular seat post, regular seats, Crank bros wheels or Mavics I would probably be in the mid-20'slbs range....


Anything light doesn't apply to me. I am 6'2 250 pounds and pretty fracking solid. My hardtail is a 09 Norco Sasquatch North Shore Free Ride bike with 6.5 inches front travel.


----------



## wickerman1 (Dec 24, 2003)

Everyone gets saddle butt until you a$$ gets used to the saddle. I have never replaced a saddle or bought a susp seatpost to cure my saddle butt isues (unless you are in a situation like BATMANs) when getting on the bike after not being on it for some time. With a micro adjustable seatpost, you could have a carbon fiber saddle and it will be comfortable.
WHen riding if your cheeks hurt, bring the nose of the saddle up a bit. if you feel the paint up front,. lower the front, and raise the rear of the seat abit and ride until you find the sweet spot. Sometimes it could take many adjustments to get it right but you will.


----------



## BATMANs (Feb 19, 2007)

I was looking for a Norco Fluid prior to this frame.


----------



## bog (Jun 3, 2004)

BATMANs said:


> I bought the frame new from a Bike shop that had a frame laying around.
> 
> It's a 4-5" travel frame.
> 
> yes, it's extra weight. the bike weighs 32lbs.


Not a snowball's chance in he!! that it weighs 32lbs. Let's see it hanging from a good scale like a Park or Ultimate.


----------



## willtsmith_nwi (Jan 1, 1970)

nitrousjunky said:


> I've used both and the LT is junk compared to the ST (in my opinion). The ST take the edge off without feeling it move, the LT feels like your sitting on the end of a diving board.
> 
> I agree with boomn, make sure he has a good saddle and shorts too.


Certainly one should get a good saddle fit and set it up properly.

Back to the Thudbuster LT. You get used to it. Just remember that the more spring you have into it, the better it can soak up the negatives. Anything that would buck you, you need to stand up for anyway. And if it has too much movement, you can either use a stronger elastomer or adjust the preload. I love mine.

I see the short travel primarily for road use and frames where you just don't have enough clearance for the LT. Personally, I'm about to pull the trigger on an ST for my road bike.


----------



## willtsmith_nwi (Jan 1, 1970)

rydbyk said:


> I love the ST. I would love to see that post in a much lighter version. They would make tons of money on a lighter one for sure!


I talked to the Cane Creek guys last year at NHMBS in Indianapolis. I got the impression that they didn't think there would be a market for it for the price it would come in at. They seemed to think that the weight weenies would definitely rather put the money into a lighter short travel frame than a seatpost.

With the advent of the GF superfly and a resurgence on hardtail 29ers in pro XC racing, I would hope they would reconsider. At the very least, they could offer an ST in carbon. I would imagine it would still sell around $200.


----------



## BATMANs (Feb 19, 2007)

bog said:


> Not a snowball's chance in he!! that it weighs 32lbs. Let's see it hanging from a good scale like a Park or Ultimate.


*My parts and weight in grams:*

Raleigh Phase 2 Frame 3260g
Rock Shox Revelation XX Dual Air 150mm Maxle Lite w/XLoc Hydraulic Remote White	1636g
Ritchey Comp O/S Road Adjustable Stem 31.8 x 100mm x 45D range 224g
Ritchey WCS Rizer Mountain Handlebars White 283g
Cane Creek Thudbuster LT 27.2x400* 545g
Shimano XTR M970 170mm Crankset w/BB 44-32-22t 775g
Shimano XTR M970 11-34t Cassette 250g
XTR FD-M970 T-Swing Dual Pull Multi-Clamp Front Derailleur 125g
Shimano XTR M970 SGS Low Normal Rear Derailleur 197g
Shimano XTR PD-M970 Clipless Pedals 325g
Shimano XTR M970 Front Quick Release 56g
Shimano XTR M970 Rear Quick Release 62g
SM-RT97L 203mm Centerlock Rotor 202g
XT M775 74mm front or rear, resin pads.* 223g
XTR ST-M975 Hydro Brake/Shift Lever Set 442g
Ergon GX-2 Carbon Barend Black 180g
KMC X9 SL Gold, 9-Speed Chain 229g
Can Creek Cloud Nine 234g
King NoThreadSet 1 1/8" Silver Sotto Voce 77g
Grimeca Front Magnesium wheel 1224g
Grimeca Rear Magnesium wheel 1495g
Maxxis Larsen Tires 1000g
Seat	
Cables	
Fluid

*That's 13044 grams or 28.75lbs so far. *


----------



## wickerman1 (Dec 24, 2003)

bog said:


> Not a snowball's chance in he!! that it weighs 32lbs. Let's see it hanging from a good scale like a Park or Ultimate.


the entire drivetrain is XtR... the wheels are magnesium.... why wouldn't it weight 32lbs? if he could use a carbon post and regular saddle it would bring it down another pound.


----------



## boomn (Jul 6, 2007)

wickerman1 said:


> the entire drivetrain is XtR... the wheels are magnesium.... why wouldn't it weight 32lbs? if he could use a carbon post and regular saddle it would bring it down another pound.


i think he's saying the opposite of what you think. It doesn't seem right that it ways _that much_, but then again the saddle alone is likely 2 lbs


----------



## BATMANs (Feb 19, 2007)

Yeah, what exactly is "bog" saying?


----------



## flyag1 (Jun 9, 2007)

If I were looking for a TB seat post it would be the Short for sure.... 

Look closely at the design of the post: as the TB compresses it moves in a arch... taking your saddle to the rear and down. So if you stay on the seat during compression it's like adding 30mm of setback and lowering the post. If that happens then you're no longer in the correct position over your pedals and you're really having to reach for your bars. 

I ended up getting rid of my long post after only 1 epic ride and ended up going to a telescopic RockShox seat post just for Epic rides. The rest of the time just stayed on my ridged post. 

Your other option my be to do what I just did, pick up an Epic Comp 29er for those Epic days...


----------



## willtsmith_nwi (Jan 1, 1970)

flyag1 said:


> Look closely at the design of the post: as the TB compresses it moves in a arch... taking your saddle to the rear and down.
> 
> 
> > Yes, that's a feature that makes it better than a telescoping post as it neutralizes the natural motion of a a rear wheel buck.
> ...


----------



## Matt_SLC (Aug 6, 2012)

*LT the way to go*

I have been riding Thudbusters for years (30,000+ miles). I would go with the long travel. Unless you are really heavy, you can adjust the stiffness with the different elaatomers and reduce the travel if necessary. From my experance, I think you will like the longer travel.


----------



## Matt_SLC (Aug 6, 2012)

Stay high. Virgin River Rim trail above Cedar City, from Najavo Lake to Woods Ranch, avoid the section from najavo to Strawberry point. Park City - take your pick.


----------



## wobbem (Jul 19, 2009)

lol, talking to ghosts there mate


----------

