mala

I'd like to get a thudbuster, just to iron out the smaller bumps and reduce fatigue. The LT version is highly rated and does exactly what I want one for. But there is also the ST version which is lighter but less travel.
Has anyone tried the ST version who can give me a review as there are loads of reviews for the LT but none for the ST.

ps.

Before anyone starts -

1. Yes, I know a suspension seat post is no substitute for a FS, I just want it for comfort not for doing drops etc.
2. Yes, I am a pansy for wanting a sus seatpost, I ride for fitness and for fun only so why not.

(I've seen the comments some people have made about suspension seatposts)

C Law

A pus*y, not a pansy

mala

Yes ok, and I also press wild flowers and strut about in suspenders.

Speedub.Nate

Here's a link to my review:

https://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=55194

They truly are two very different seatposts. The LT would countinue to be my choice if I didn't have a full suspension XC bike to pick from.

After spending some time on a Salsa soft tail this past weekend, I'd equate it to the Thud ST, and the LT offering quite a bit more compliance.

Raiyn

As long as you're going into this well informed.
The ST will take the edge off and will be the lesser of the two evils

mala

mmmm, the ST seems more appealing of the two at the moment, less weight, better looks, and just enough to take the edge off. I think i'd be a bit worried the LT would make too much of a difference to the way the bike felt. But the LT gets such good reviews, I guess I'll have to think about it some more.

alcahueteria

I got one, don't know which, it was given to me. While it was nice, I noticed I couldn't handle near as well, I think it through off my geometry and therefore my balance, unless I was standing that is...

Dannihilator

Or you can save up for the seat post that will last forever..

*Cough*Thomson*Cough*

willtsmith_nwi

It's also the lesser of two travels.

The target audience for the ST model is ROAD BIKERS who experience very few bumps to begin with. If you're planning on riding on a trail, the LT is the better choice. You get more travel and the system is a little more tuneable with two elastomers instead of one.

Don't listen to Raiyn about this particular topic. It's like asking a wine connesiuer whether they prefer Michelob or Budweiser. He would rather you buy a $3500 Specialized Epic over a $110 seatpost upgrade.

Don't worry about the weight. The weight you add is always offset against the value something provides. A full 2L camelback weighs more than a thudbuster. That doesn't mean you should travel without water.

Raiyn

Do you really want to go there with me? After all I can back what I say compared to some others here

willtsmith_nwi

About pansies and suspension ...

If Sussy seatpost users are pansies, than full suspension cyclists are three times the pansies. I honestly don't know why full boinger users bother to comment on what hardtailers should put between their seat and their rear wheel.

BTW, as far as Thompson posts and lasting forever ... The thudbuster 3G is rebuildable. If a piece sheers off, Cane Creek will send you a new one. Thats about as forever as you can get.

Nothing against Full Suspension or Thompson seatposts. Just try to be senstive to what hard-tailers need to make their EXISTING ride move better.

Dannihilator

Or the person can get a $90 Thomson seat post that won't break in 3-5 years and last the person the rest of their life unlike that $110 Thudbuster.

Raiyn

You just don't know when to quit do you?If a piece sheared off my seatpost I wouldn't WANT a new one from that company regardless of type. A suspension seat post just adds complicated bits a lot closer to my family legacy than I want them. The more complicated a system the more likely it is to fail."Nothing against" my rear end. You've bashed them through this ENTIRE post at least get your story straight

Dannihilator

Tell that to someone like Wade Simmons or Josh Bender.

As said all cane creeks are designed to self destruct by the end of this year. I'd sooner get a thomson and put the saved money towards a brooks saddle, but hey it's not my call on Mala's decision.

mala

To be honest I think this now makes the most sense, I dont mind the little extra weight, and as far as reliablility and servicing goes, it souldnt be a problem. After all FS probably requires more looking after than a thudbuster. (not that i'm comparing a sus seatpost to a FS bike you understand. I dont want to get gragged into the arguing).

willtsmith_nwi

Wow, I didn't follow this thread.

Raiyn, I'm not criticizing you. I am not criticizing full suspension bikes. I never have. You have put those words in my mouth. And if it seemed I called FS user pansies, I did not. I made an appeal for people to use apply their standards in a uniform matter. Nor have I ever criticized Thompson in any way. From all reports, it's really good stuff. My first full boinger will most certainly sport a Thompson seatpost.

The guy wants to take the edge off his ride and people turn around and recommend an aluminum Thompson rigid. The least you could do is get creative and recommend a titanium post for that little bit of lightweight flex. There is no "lesser" of two evils here. There is selecting the tool to do the job that the guy is asking about. This is almost opposite to answering by simply projecting your personal prejudices on the situation.

I have seen too many people break seatposts to get all bothered about Thudbuster. If a seatpost does break, your butt will end up on the rear wheel. And for the record, the 3G Thudbuster has yet to break under my 280 pounds. I've broken a handful of elastomers. They're designed to break and this is why you're probably less likely to break a 3G Thudbuster than pretty much any other seat out there. It has a pre-designated point of "replaceable" failure. When they do break, I usually don't notice for a minute or two. It's completely safe.

If a more complicated system is more likely to fail ... pretty much all suspension systems out there are more likely to fail than a Thudbuster. It's a pretty simple mechanism. And if you are applying such strict standards for design simplicity, than you should probably strip all your gears and suspension off your bike and get back to basics. Many folks do, and it has been my observation that these folks are the best cyclists I've seen.

stapfam

I ride an offroad Tandem and this requires a good stokers suspension post. 18 months ago I went to a Thudbuster LT and have not regretted it. This is probably the best suspension post around and the quality of manufacture is superb. On the back of this thing- I cannot see the bumps coming up. I have yet to bottom out the post and that is on some pretty bads lumps the Tandenm has hit.

As the post is the same size as my solo- I occasionally just swop it to that bike for some of the longer rides, and it works on that as well. Being a hardtail rider- with a Thudbuster- who needs ful suspension?
I was looking at the ST but it is for road use. Potholes and rough surfaces are not the same as Offroad so go for the LT.

Problems- None really but set the elastomers up for the top end of your weight. High cadence can set up a bit of bobbing with the lower settings. High cadence to me is around 100. The unusual movement on compression was unnerving at first- but the leg length does not alter as with a normal post.

blue_neon

Dear god, this last last post in this thread (besides the most recent one) was EXACTLY one year ago from today!

willtsmith_nwi

DOHHHH!!!!!

I didn't see the year. I thought this was a 2 month old jab that I failed to respond to.

On another note, it is rather odd to read your writing weeks and months after you wrote it and be shocked when you see your name next to some stuff. Oh yeah ... I did write that.