Hardtail/Sus Post vs Softtail?



P

(PeteCresswell)

Guest
What are the tradeoffs of a hard tail with good suspension post like Cane
Creek's ThudBuster or even a sprung saddle vs a soft tail with solid saddle?

Seems like the soft tail has less travel than a ThudBuster.

Both lack any damping.

I'm guessing that any effect from the diff in unsprung weight is negligible.


How about efficiency? Does the soft tail soak up pedaling effort?

Is durability an issue with soft tails? The number of times something can bend
before it breaks and all that...
--
PeteCresswell
 
P

p e t e f a g e r l i n

Guest
(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> What are the tradeoffs of a hard tail with good suspension post like Cane
> Creek's ThudBuster or even a sprung saddle vs a soft tail with solid saddle?


Consider the fact that your saddle to BB distance
is constantly changing when you use a suspension
seatpost.

Also consider that a softail's suspension still
works when you're off the saddle.
 
P

(PeteCresswell)

Guest
Per p e t e f a g e r l i n:
>Consider the fact that your saddle to BB distance
>is constantly changing when you use a suspension
>seatpost.


Hasn't been an issue with me once I realized the frame hadn't broken in
half...but I definitely had a few "What the heck.!???" moments on the first
ride.


>Also consider that a softail's suspension still
>works when you're off the saddle.


Hadn't thought of that.

Has anybody - preferably somebody with less tolerance to jarring than most - had
a chance to A/B the two solutions?
--
PeteCresswell
 
P

(PeteCresswell)

Guest
Per (PeteCresswell):
>Has anybody - preferably somebody with less tolerance to jarring than most - had
>a chance to A/B the two solutions?


I should probably mention my agenda for posting this.

My bread-and-butter bike is an FS, but I still appreciate riding a hardtail.

In fact, I appreciate it enough that I'm thinking about replacing my current HT
frame (which is something of a crime against nature as I tried to tell the
builder too much about what dimensions to use) with something closer in
balance/fit/performance to my FS.

Long legs, weird proportions... so it'll probably be another custom, but this
time I will throw myself on the mercy of the builder.

On a hard tail, I always ride a sus post. Tried sprung saddles, but the
occasional 'surprise' bumps moved me to the sus post.

Now that I think of it, I guess my real question is whether or not a rider can
hit a bump that they didn't see (i.e. they didn't get off the saddle in time...)
with a soft tail and not get jarred too badly. That's the attraction of Cane
Creek's ThudBuster for me: saves that occasionally lower-back-strain bump.
--
PeteCresswell
 
J

JD

Guest
(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> On a hard tail, I always ride a sus post.



Do you take a shower with a raincoat on too?

JD
 
S

Scott G

Guest
> Now that I think of it, I guess my real question is whether or not a rider
> can
> hit a bump that they didn't see (i.e. they didn't get off the saddle in
> time...)
> with a soft tail and not get jarred too badly. That's the attraction of
> Cane
> Creek's ThudBuster for me: saves that occasionally lower-back-strain bump.



I thought soft-tails were all but dead. Maybe you should consider a FS bike
that is not so plush...like a Giant NRS or similiar.
 
R

Ride-A-Lot

Guest
Scott G wrote:
>> Now that I think of it, I guess my real question is whether or not a rider
>> can
>> hit a bump that they didn't see (i.e. they didn't get off the saddle in
>> time...)
>> with a soft tail and not get jarred too badly. That's the attraction of
>> Cane
>> Creek's ThudBuster for me: saves that occasionally lower-back-strain bump.

>
>
> I thought soft-tails were all but dead. Maybe you should consider a FS bike
> that is not so plush...like a Giant NRS or similiar.
>
>


Salsa Dos Niner. Not dead.

--
o-o-o-o Ride-A-Lot o-o-o-o
www.schnauzers.ws
 
P

(PeteCresswell)

Guest
Per Scott G:
>I thought soft-tails were all but dead. Maybe you should consider a FS bike
>that is not so plush...like a Giant NRS or similiar.


That was in the back of my mind - and I was thinking maybe it's because of sus
posts.


My FS is anything but plush (Maverick link suspension) and has virtually no
rear-end bob.

But the hard tail has a different feel that I enjoy sometimes.
--
PeteCresswell
 
T

Tom Purvis

Guest
Per (PeteCresswell):
>...I guess my real question is whether or not a rider can
>hit a bump that they didn't see (i.e. they didn't get off the saddle in time...)
>with a soft tail and not get jarred too badly...


No. You can't ride them like a full-suspension bike. You can't just
sit there and let the bike soak up the bump. You ride the bike like
a hardtail. And if you get a real softail, it has no damping. Just a
spring that helps the stays rebound. If you just sit there, a Moots
YBB will launch you up into the air after the compression slams
your package.

I rode a YBB for 5 seasons. The softail has benefit, but not in
terms of riding 3-dimensional terrain. You have to ride technical
just like a hardtail.

Oddly, I just took my 2nd ride on my new thudbuster yesterday.
Seems like it's going to work at least as well as the .75" softail
did. And the thing I used to justify buying the softail, that the
distance from saddle to pedals never changes, doesn't really
seem to matter. I like pedalling on the thud, and hardly notice
that it's moving.
--
Tom Purvis - http://www.arkansasvalley.net/tpurvis/
 
Z

Zilla

Guest
Sus. post is for comfort; FS is for function, that also
provides comfort.

--
- Zilla
Cary, NC USA
(Remove XSPAM)


"(PeteCresswell)" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
> What are the tradeoffs of a hard tail with good suspension post like Cane
> Creek's ThudBuster or even a sprung saddle vs a soft tail with solid

saddle?
>
> Seems like the soft tail has less travel than a ThudBuster.
>
> Both lack any damping.
>
> I'm guessing that any effect from the diff in unsprung weight is

negligible.
>
>
> How about efficiency? Does the soft tail soak up pedaling effort?
>
> Is durability an issue with soft tails? The number of times something

can bend
> before it breaks and all that...
> --
> PeteCresswell
 
P

(PeteCresswell)

Guest
Per Tom Purvis:
> And the thing I used to justify buying the softail, that the
>distance from saddle to pedals never changes, doesn't really
>seem to matter.


First time on mine I thought the frame had broken down at the BB shell.

Within fifteen minutes I had stopped even noticing it.
--
PeteCresswell
 
S

Scott Gordo

Guest
(PeteCresswell) wrote:
> What are the tradeoffs of a hard tail with good suspension post like Cane
> Creek's ThudBuster or even a sprung saddle vs a soft tail with solid saddle?
>
> Seems like the soft tail has less travel than a ThudBuster.
>
> Both lack any damping.
>
> I'm guessing that any effect from the diff in unsprung weight is negligible.
>
>
> How about efficiency? Does the soft tail soak up pedaling effort?
>
> Is durability an issue with soft tails? The number of times something can bend
> before it breaks and all that...
> --
> PeteCresswell


I've never used a sus post or soft-tail. This ad is from 1896.

http://www.fixedgeargallery.com/articles/scientificamerican/13.jpg

/s
 
G

GeeDubb

Guest
"JD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>> On a hard tail, I always ride a sus post.

>
>
> Do you take a shower with a raincoat on too?
>
> JD
>


you been peeking through the curtain again?

Gary
 
J

JD

Guest
GeeDubb wrote:
> "JD" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> >
> > (PeteCresswell) wrote:
> >> On a hard tail, I always ride a sus post.

> >
> >
> > Do you take a shower with a raincoat on too?
> >
> > JD
> >

>
> you been peeking through the curtain again?
>
> Gary



No, that's why I asked.

JD had x-ray spex in 3rd grade
 
P

Phil, Squid-in-Training

Guest
Scott G wrote:
>> Now that I think of it, I guess my real question is whether or not a
>> rider can
>> hit a bump that they didn't see (i.e. they didn't get off the saddle
>> in time...)
>> with a soft tail and not get jarred too badly. That's the
>> attraction of Cane
>> Creek's ThudBuster for me: saves that occasionally lower-back-strain
>> bump.

>
>
> I thought soft-tails were all but dead. Maybe you should consider a
> FS bike that is not so plush...like a Giant NRS or similiar.


It's funny that you mention that... the Giant NRS is dead, too, replaced by
the Giant Anthem for 2006. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the
primary motivation for doing this is to avoid the Specialized/Horst patent
licensing fees.
--
Phil, Squid-in-Training
 
P

Phil, Squid-in-Training

Guest
Scott Gordo wrote:
> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>> What are the tradeoffs of a hard tail with good suspension post like
>> Cane Creek's ThudBuster or even a sprung saddle vs a soft tail
>> with solid saddle?
>>
>> Seems like the soft tail has less travel than a ThudBuster.
>>
>> Both lack any damping.
>>
>> I'm guessing that any effect from the diff in unsprung weight is
>> negligible.
>>
>>
>> How about efficiency? Does the soft tail soak up pedaling effort?
>>
>> Is durability an issue with soft tails? The number of times
>> something can bend before it breaks and all that...
>> --
>> PeteCresswell

>
> I've never used a sus post or soft-tail. This ad is from 1896.
>
> http://www.fixedgeargallery.com/articles/scientificamerican/13.jpg
>
> /s


Gawd, even the marketing "statistics" sound as random as they do now.
Nothing has changed.
--
Phil, Squid-in-Training
 
S

Scott G

Guest
> It's funny that you mention that... the Giant NRS is dead, too, replaced
> by the Giant Anthem for 2006. I'm going to go out on a limb and say the
> primary motivation for doing this is to avoid the Specialized/Horst patent
> licensing fees.
> --


Just Googled the Anthem...doesn't look much like NRS at all. Why not just
pay the fees?