I love riding hardtails and yes a full suss probably would be the way to go but anyone have any thoughts on hardtails that go easy on the lower back. My initial thoughts are the 456Ti (not sure if the new frame is as springy as the old one) or maybe a steel or carbon....... Or a suspension seatpost to take the edge off perhaps!!
Recently started riding a HT again after about 6years on FS and my back was in pieces so I tried the thud buster st. One of the best bits of kit you can buy.
I fitted a ti WTB saddle in place off SDG and the bike is transformed.
My mate road a thudbuster on his HT after braking his back in Whistler... used it for a year till his back was all good again. Really rated it, said it was brilliant.
thud buster in a pipedream sirius works for me .
I use a Van Nic Ti seatpost on my steel 456 - would recommend it to anyone who wants a bit more cush.
a nice [cotic]springy steel frame a U.S.E suspension seat post and a comfy saddle , ive found my charge spoon to be one of the comfiest saddles i ve ever owned
BTW When I used my 456SS with an EC90 post it was waaaay comfier than now with the Thomson post. Would come back to it but I got myself a ti frame for XC and 456SS for silliness.
Find a HT with butted tubes, strengthen your core muscles.
I doubt that the frame material is going to make much difference to your back issues.
How much is the frame likely to flex? Of the order of millimetres? What's the size of the obstacles/roughness you will be riding over? Probably at least centimetres, up to tens of centimetres, and maybe drops that are larger still.
IMO saddle, seatpost, tyres and riding position will be more important. As will standing up on the rough stuff.
Carbon seatpost definately makes it more comfy when going over the rough stuff.. Get out the saddle and you won't have the problem. 😉
strengthen your core muscles.
+1
From my experience - if you have any back problems a sus seatpost on a hardtail does not come close to the protection you get from a full sus frame. If you dont have back problems and are just looking for comfort I'm sure you'll be fine.
The differences will be tiny but a good one would be a Sanderson Life.
In addition if frames are now CEN they'll be stiffer anyway?
Better to go tubeless on a bigger volume rear tyre - thats the biggest gains.
In addition, Thudbuster- tried that. AWFUL.
I have spent 2 months off the bike with a back injury <sympathy please as had none from my wife> got out for the first time at the weekend on my rigid Cotic Simple
How much is the frame likely to flex? Of the order of millimetres?
<1mm for typical bumps and standardish frames last time I did the calcs! The idea that a "flexible" steel or ti frame helps with comfort on the bumps in the same way as a full-sus or even a sus-seatpost is just so much BS. As you suggest tyres and saddle will have some effect - the seatpost flexing (if not a sus-post) adds a bit, but it's small enough to be negligible in the context. Of course standing up helps, but it's far from ideal having to do that with a bad back IME (I bought a full-sus after doing a Polaris and not being able to decide between standing and sitting at the end - both made my back hurt).
So the answer if you really don't want to go full-sus is a big fat back tyre [b]and[/b] a sus-post. Also worth thinking about geometry and riding position.
Longterm, if you really want to extend your riding 'career' I'd switch to a short travel full suss for any back sufferers.
Spesh Epic?
Why suffer for your art? Longterm you'll wake up one day with a permanently niggly-spongled back which will end up you having longer spells off the bike until one day........ you realise you haven't ridden for a year.
Thanks all, some really good food for thought here :o)
Few mates with dodgy backs swear by use suspension posts. Let me know if you fancy trying one - I bought one for a particularly bumpy mayhem on a rigid bike, which I have not used since..
J
Everyone is different i know, but for me my Thudbuster LT is a great bit of kit. Used to run it on my old Trek 8000 and made it way less harsh. It's now on my SS Inbred 29er and is great. Obviously not a replacement for FS but takes the sting out of the ride and means you can peddle whilst sat down more over the bumpy stuff.
Works so well you don't really notice it - until you put a rigid post back in again and you then realise what a great job it's been doing.....
I saw a really nice bike on Cannock Chase last week with one of those Brooks saddles with the gert big springs at the back. We laughed a bit - then thought what a good alternative to a suspension seatpost.
"Fit" is more important than "give" if you've got back problems. I used to use a USE sus post, but it didn't really help me; I found that changing saddle position, bar height and bar width did a lot more to help.
With a bad back, DON'T get a BFe with a Thomson post and a Charge Spoon Saddle is all I'll say... 😉
Just had 18 months off the bike after spinal fusion following a disk giving up. In fact Sunday I made a return to swinley and felt reborn!! I adjusted the saddle position and brought a shorter stem to give me a more upright position.
I really rate the USE seatpost. Was torn between this and the thudbuster but didn't like the look of the movement of the thudbuster
Used the USE xcr carbon for kielder 100 and it felt great. Have kept it on ever since
I use a Sumo USE shokpost on a Van Nic Tuareg and really like it.
Just enough to take the trail buzz out ,will take the edge of a big hit and does not bob.
It does however have a side to side movement that I can't get rid of (I have tried new keys) but I am used to it now.
[b]Tricky [/b]
Does your carbon one have the side to side thing going on?
I saw a really nice bike on Cannock Chase last week with one of those Brooks saddles with the gert big springs at the back.
Spotted at Afan the other week too, seemed to work!
With a bad back, DON'T get a BFe with a Thomson post and a Charge Spoon Saddle is all I'll say.
Pace RC303 probably not a good call either.:-)
Cotic Soul with a good quality carbon post & WTB Rocket V Ti saddle would be my choice. Some 2.3-2.4 tubeless tyres also a good call, 2.35 SB8's for Summer / Nev/Blue Groove for the rest.
I've heard normal Cro-Mo is not as stiff as 853 so the Sanderson Breath might be a good one.
Not sure if conventional stays are more comfortable than wishbone types. Anyone ?
Do some people sit down all the time.....
things that will usually make a hardtail a bit more comfortable:
- small diameter seatpost (small being 27.2ish)
- long, flexy seatpost
- skinny/correctly ovalised top tube
- suspension seatpost
- fatter/lower pressure tyres
And that's about it...
I've heard normal Cro-Mo is not as stiff as 853 so the Sanderson Breath might be a good one
Without kicking it all off again, no - all steels are the same stiffness but have differing strength so unless the 853 has much thinner tube walls it won't more flexy and even then the actual frame design and other aspects as above will have far more influence.
And the profile of stays makes next to no difference at all - it's just marketing.
My back used to give me jip when I rode my old 853 Kona Explosif, so I bought a 853 Cotic Soul. So much more comfortable but I still find the comfort of it seems to relate to the tyres I run. 2.1 Kendas at 30 psi give me back ache, 2.35 at the same pressure are much better. I always wondered why my 853 Dialled Alpine was easier on my back, but one I used the same tyres on both bikes the difference was less noticeable. I still think the difference in their respective seat tube angles may have something to do with it, but even though they are all made of the same tubing there are still so many other variables(top tube length, stem, seat post, saddle) it's difficult to get a definitive answer.
Do some people sit down all the time.....
I do when its my round.
Although a Cotic Soul is a smoother ride than most, as said above it's no FS if you want protection, and the best bit of advice I've seen by far is figuring out your riding position to give you a more comfortable set up, plus stretch your hamstrings and quads everyday as they pull like mad on your lower back if tight. Try a much higher bar position, try tilting your saddle forwards (to prevent backwards rotation of your hips and curving of lower back), try a shorter position. Hell, spend £40 on a proper physio assessment of your posture and strength. There's no magic bullet. One of my bikes will make it a little better, but getting fixed is biomechanical, not equipment.
You're rubbish at marketing Cy.
What you should have written (using skills I learnt on the Neovite thread) is:
A Cotic will make you ride further, faster and in more comfort than any other frame. Several riders have said so and as such it's definitely true plus some studies show that iron in your diet improves athletic performance and since the Soul is steel, it will osmotically transfer performance to you through mycocardial transverse pathways resulting in you going faster still ( I first saw this effect in a Peruvian Rain Forest tribe).The CEN test also adds speed to the frame through dynamic transferrance of stress through the freeflowing welds while helping to avoid stressing your aerobic system due to the reduction in strain at the head tube.
And women will throw themselves at you.
As always excellent guidance people, I think I have a game plan that may well mix some Physio with the right frame, set up and posture, basically I'll try it all....
fasthaggis > yes.. thought it wasn't tightened at first but there's a slight bit of play side to side
And the profile of stays makes next to no difference at all - it's just marketing.
Bit of a sweeping statement no?
OK a hardtail is a hardtail, it's not supposed to have suspension, but some are designed to give/flex more than others, and some (like my BFe) are designed to be as direct as possible and end up being unforgiving as a result quite often...
Talking about what's actually out there, no, I don't think it is. Stays are triangulated, relatively short and consequently flex is very small compared to other things be that tyres, seatposts even the frame main tubes which you can visibly see flex. Obviously if you made stays thin/narrow enough they'd provide lots of flex but it'd be crap under power and fatigue could be a problem too so just not practical in the real world.
As to wavy stays, because there isn't significant flex in the rear triangle, it's pretty irrelevant.
I should probably add that I did some stress analysis on this at uni as part of a project and that's why I'm confident it's right. The results of that showed that the top tube has far more effect on 'comfort' than the stays because it deflects more and you'll see that on frames like the Spesh Roubaix which are designed for compliance with it's heavily ovalised tt at the seat tube.
As said fit is probably more important.
I run a 2nd generation 456Ti and recently moved from a normal I-Beam post to a carbon I-Beam post - amazing difference in comfort.
I'd have thought that the single most important thing would be riding position which is probably going to mean higher bars.
I got ti456 with a ti post and saddle. It replaced a Chameleon with a Thomson post. Helped my back enormously 🙂
Stays are triangulated, relatively short and consequently flex is very small compared to other things be that tyres, seatposts even the frame main tubes which you can visibly see flex.
I'm not disagreeing, a large back tyre, a saddle with flexy rails and a long thin seatpost will make infinitely more difference than a frame designed to have a bit more flex.
Obviously if you made stays thin/narrow enough they'd provide lots of flex but it'd be crap under power and fatigue could be a problem too so just not practical in the real world.
If you make it out of aly, yes fatigue is going to be a problem. With steel, or certainly ti, I don't think you'd ever stretch/bend/compress a stay in any way shape or form enough to push it past its elastic limit. So fatigue shouldn't really be an issue.
As to wavy stays, because there isn't significant flex in the rear triangle, it's pretty irrelevant.
I'd always assumed more to do with mud clearance issues, or just to look nice to be fair, but if bendy enough (a la Whyte 19 steel or ti) they could make a bit of difference probably.
I should probably add that I did some stress analysis on this at uni as part of a project and that's why I'm confident it's right.
Fair enough, I would agree with you that it's nowhere near as important as some people make out, but it can make a difference. Have you ever ridden a really flexy, noodly titanium hardtail? You can't question its strength as the material is inherently strong, it's just quite a flexible material compared to ally or even steel. If you look at something like a first generation Cotic Soda (known to be pretty flexy, I've seen one visibly bend a lot at the BB/chainstay area) compared to something with much beefier/stiffer stays from the outset... It's actually visible. OK, the flex may literally only be a few mm (so less than a 2.3" tyre would deflect under load by some margin), but there is a difference.
Haven't read the the entire thread, so it may have been suggested already.
Get a steel frame - it has a magical zing property that will make it exactly like a full suss frame but without losing any of the hardtail benefits.
I'd have thought that the single most important thing would be riding position which is probably going to mean higher bars.
Not necessarily at all... I suffer from back pain a bit, sometimes it comes on whilst I'm riding.
The way I'd combat it on a bike would be to ride a bike 2 sizes too big for me, with a negative rise stem and flat bars... To stretch me out and stop any curvature occuring in my back.
A shorter more upright position is great for control, but not so great for my back at all!
b r & wippersnapper - your thoughts on the 2nd Gen 456Ti? Is it stiff out back or does it give? (I had the 1st Gen and it felt super springy).
Mboy - reread my post 🙂
I didn't say frames don't make a difference as I've ridden lots and there clearly is a difference but I don't reckon it's down to the stays but rather the frame as a whole and is significantly influenced by the top tube and interestingly, frame 'splay' where the wheels move apart (fork plays a large part in this).
Tubeless + Rubber Queen 2.4 at the back, run about 20psi and you'll have a noticeably more compliant hardtail, regardless of which frame you go for. Works really well in my experience.
Deevass, I forgot to say, mine is the old one too.
Speaking as someone who has always ridden a HT and then suffered from a prolapsed disk (Then having surgery to correct) I would suggest a suspension seat post. I had a cane creek one that really helped. I know they look ugly and they add weight etc but from a comfort point of view it really helped my back.
I now have a full sus, partly due to the kind of biking I do but even for general XC stuff, crunching miles etc i don't come home feeling like I need another MRI to see if my back has gone again.
Don't suspension seat posts **** up your pedaling when they compress?
Only if you set them up too soft
Didn't Brant say that some FEA or other modelling suggested that the chainstays (or seat or both, can't remember) counterintuitively tended to 'want' to flex horizontally rather than vertically under load? So if you were to flatten them in the opposite direction to what you'd think, i.e. pinched from the sides rather than the top and bottom, it would have the greater effect in increasing what we refer to as 'vertical' compliance? Not sure what this would do for 'lateral' stiffness or the tendency of the rear wheel to move relative to the headtube, but that might also have a counterintuitive effect!
The latest carbon frames seem to have really narrow but not flattened seatstays to increase 'vertical compliance', wonder if that allows this horizontal flexure to occur more easily? Empirically, I've been unable to feel much in the way of frame differences that couldn't have been saddle, seatpost or tyre differences, apart from a Specialized Roubaix which seems genuinely a lot 'softer' than the steel frame and forks it replaced - and it has the same saddle, tyres, a fatter diameter seatpost bars and stem (all of which should increase stiffness), same rear wheel, tyre pressures etc. If I could find a carbon XC frame that did the same I'd be all over it - tempted to try the new Scotts and Cannondales that advertise low weights AND high 'comfort'...
Haven't read the the entire thread, so it may have been suggested already.Get a steel frame - it has a magical zing property that will make it exactly like a full suss frame but without losing any of the hardtail benefits.
Well if you did bother to read the thread you'd notice that people are shooting down that theory! Remember we're talking about real compliance to bumps here (compared to a full-sus, sus post or fat soft tyres), not some "magical zing" property of the frame.
If you make it out of aly, yes fatigue is going to be a problem. With steel, or certainly ti, I don't think you'd ever stretch/bend/compress a stay in any way shape or form enough to push it past its elastic limit. So fatigue shouldn't really be an issue.
Except that you don't need to stress steel or ti past their elastic limit in order to fatigue them (if you did that would be yield rather than fatigue). Whilst they do have a "fatigue limit", that's well short of the elastic limit, and designing the stays to flex sideways enough to give any sort of suspension effect is very likely (I'd say almost certain, but can't be bothered running the numbers to back that up) to put them over that. There is a lot of misunderstanding about this "steel and ti don't fatigue" thing, with some lightweight steel/ti bikes flexing enough that they will fatigue, whilst many alu bikes are sturdy enough and well enough designed that they'll last a lifetime of normal use.
FWIW I did some calcs on frame flex a while ago (for "fun" rather than a uni dissertation), and came to pretty much the same conclusion clubber did, that any vertical frame flex was down to "splay" in the main triangle, rather than flex in the stay area. Though it's still a very minor effect compared even to a normal rear tyre or a saddle, and most splay is due to fork rather than frame flex.
Haven't read the the entire thread, so it may have been suggested already.
Get a steel frame - it has a magical zing property that will make it exactly like a full suss frame but without losing any of the hardtail benefits.
That was a tounge in cheek comment, surely?
I had a similar dilemma years ago, had a HT frame that I really liked but it did give me a sore back, a big tubeless tyre and a saddle and seat post with a bit of give were much better additions than the cake creek thudbuster I got.
Where as the big tyre and seatpost/saddle make the bike feel just the same (or better) but with a little more comfort, the thudbuster made the riding experience awful.
Maybe they have improved since I used it but it was the single most horrible thing I have ever used, no matter what I did it had a horrible top out and the seat position changing all the time was like riding a rocking horse. A full sus is although a lot more cash, is a much better answer than a suspension seat post, they might be a different riding experience but at least they still feel like a bike!
Sounds like you had it much too soft. It should be set so that it doesn't move at all while pedalling on normal reasonably smooth trails. It should only move on the bigger hits which are what actually hurt your back.
*takes aracer off the hook and pops him in the keepnet*
I've had a bad back on and off for the last 15 years following a bad accident.. My 456 was a huge improvement on the previous giant entry level thing I was using.. which I can almost definitely put down to riding position..
I hurt my back again earlier in the year during a week of heavy lifting.. after some recovery I started riding again but the 456 suddenly was agony.. I fitted a new stem to lift the bars a couple of inches and it's lovely again..
bar height etc is the key
Would have been better if you said 853 is magically more betterer too 😉
Thudbuster LT....Works so well you don't really notice it - until you put a rigid post back in again and you then realise what a great job it's been doing.....
Ditto
And stretch your hamstrings daily.
I don't think I did have it(thudbuster) that soft, although it was years ago and can't really remember. To say it was like riding a rocking horse is maybe a bit unfair, as it didn't move that much on smooth surfaces/fireroads ect or under pedaling, it was more in sections were there were a series of bigger bumps (washboard) type stuff it became horrible to ride.
Personally I found that it was more the endless smallish/mid sized bumps that hurt after a while bigger bumps weren't such a issue as tended to hop over them.
Although as mentioned before it's, correct position, stretching and strength (and professional help) work that really makes a difference to a sore back. No amount of parts, even full sus, was ever going to make that much of a difference to me, compared to actually making an effort to stretch and do core work, that has made a difference.
Though the is obviously a difference between back pain from bad posture/bike set up and lack of strength and the pain that comes from jarring form riding off road.
Bigger tyres, tubeless and slightly lower pressure. Move saddle forward a tad. Job done.
*takes aracer off the hook and pops him in the keepnet*
Bah! My excuse is that you usually get people making exactly that sort of comment completely seriously - I'm actually quite surprised that we're not getting challenged more by people who're convinced by the comfort advantage of steel/ti over alu, which is normally the case when ever this comes up.
Riding my friends VN Zion Ti, I immediately noticed how springy and spritely it was under pedalling and how this translated to good rear wheel grip when technical climbing. On descending fairly smooth trails it felt muted/damped, like having a bigger, softer tyre. (I didn't try descending at speed or anything choppy, but I expect that bike feels a bit noodly when pushed hard)
In no way does this compare to the bump flattening effect of rear suspension. But I can see why people say muting effect makes these bikes less tiring than an equivalent Alu HT.
But I still reckon it's worth investigating cushy tyres and riding position before splashing out on Ti.
Good pointers here. I ride a short stem with high rise bars, it's the short sharp jolts that cause me problems more than general trail buzz. I'm without a frame at the moment so I'm shelling out for something, just need to shell out for the right thing!! Thanks guys, lots of good comments.
[i]b r & wippersnapper - your thoughts on the 2nd Gen 456Ti? Is it stiff out back or does it give? (I had the 1st Gen and it felt super springy). [/i]
2nd generation, as in the Lynskey one with the extra tube - or do you mean the Chinese copy? 😉
kelvin - Member
"Fit" is more important than "give" if you've got back problems.
I'm with Kelvin on this - rode a too big Spesh FS a few years ago, and always suffered, went back to the HT after a little under a year, and the back problems stopped. I can follow the suspension post theory and can't dismiss it as I have not tried a suspension seatpost yet.
b r... I mean the one On One are selling now, I think that may be the copy :o)
Except that you don't need to stress steel or ti past their elastic limit in order to fatigue them (if you did that would be yield rather than fatigue). Whilst they do have a "fatigue limit", that's well short of the elastic limit
Sorry, I actually meant to say fatigue limit, not elastic limit! Ooops...
There is a lot of misunderstanding about this "steel and ti don't fatigue" thing, with some lightweight steel/ti bikes flexing enough that they will fatigue, whilst many alu bikes are sturdy enough and well enough designed that they'll last a lifetime of normal use.
Totally agree. I've seen lightweight steel frames that will bend and flex so much over a short lifespan that they're as good as useless after a few races... Anyone remember the Ritchey P20 XC Race bikes of the mid 90's that were supposedly sub 3lb for a frame iirc?
And of course there are some beefy ally frames out there that will indeed never fatigue cos there's enough material in them to make sure as good as no flex ever occurs.
It is of course, as you well know though, the inherent ability of both steel and titanium, for a given stength, to flex more than aluminium before fatiguing.
Riding my friends VN Zion Ti, I immediately noticed how springy and spritely it was under pedalling and how this translated to good rear wheel grip when technical climbing. On descending fairly smooth trails it felt muted/damped, like having a bigger, softer tyre.
I presume this is also a troll?
I have a long-term back problem. So that I don't bend forward so much, I had a made-to-measure steel frame with a taller than normal steerer tube, by a builder who was aware of the problem. It suits me fine. A suss seatpost helps, I wanted one to take out the worst of the jolts without a lot of movement.