Thudbuster LT vs. ST ( long travel vs. short travel )
04-09-06, 09:34 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Thudbuster LT vs. ST ( long travel vs. short travel )
Been looking at Thudbusters. I understand that LT has 4 in. of travel whereas ST has 1.3 in. of travel. I have been told that LT is more for trail riding and that ST is more for road. Now, I am just wondering anyone has tried both and what is your opinion. Or, why you chose one over the other?
Thanks.
Thanks.
04-09-06, 11:15 PM
#2
Folding bike junkie!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 755
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
1 Post
Buy the LT. It works great and can take the edge off really big hits better. Also it is cheaper to buy the elastomers and is easier to tune.
04-10-06, 03:44 AM
#3
Not so new
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 142
Bikes: Klein Quantum, Schwinn Peloton, Moulton AM Esprit
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
3 Posts
I have two STs, which I like very much. The ST is a little lighter, and my thought was that the ST would have plenty of travel for road riding. I suppose if you regularly ride on very rough roads or pave, then the LT would be more appropriate. For the occasional rough patch in NYC, the ST works fine.
04-10-06, 06:57 PM
#6
Not so new
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 142
Bikes: Klein Quantum, Schwinn Peloton, Moulton AM Esprit
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
3 Posts
Originally Posted by Crankypants
How would the LT compare in comfort to a sprung Brook's saddle? Would it be overkill to use them both together?
