|   Just wondering: Thudbuster vs. pivotless elastomer frames | bhutata
May 20, 2003 7:33 PM | | The thoughts that come to me on the trail. Must've been a slow day.
I was just wondering if anyone could offer any comments on the differences between riding a Thudbuster seatpost and a pivotless elastomer suspension frame. Can you even compare the experiences? A Thudbuster actually has more travel than a pivotless suspension frame. |
| moving wheel versus moving butt. | jw25
May 21, 2003 10:57 AM | | I haven't ridden a pivotless suspension frame, but I do own a Razorback, and my hardtail has a Tamer 4-bar seatpost.
The Tamer mostly suspends the rider, so you can stay seated over little ripples and bumps, but it doesn't do so much for the rear wheel. It may improve rear wheel traction some, because it stays weighted longer in the rough, but the wheel can still be bounced around.
A pivotless frame, on the other hand, lets the rear wheel track the ground directly, to some extent anyway, and aids traction on climbs. It will provide some comfort, but that isn't the main function. The Razorback has more travel, but on rough climbs is working similarly. The elastomer-based frames seem to have been replaced by short-travel shock-based designs, like the Scalpel, STP, Dean Duke, Litespeed Tsali, etc, that actually have some damping control and more travel.
So, as I see it, the two are designed for different functions, but can cross over to some extent. The long travel of the Thudbuster and similar posts accentuates this. |
| |
