LDP Truck Testing

pavedwave · LDP Truck Testing

At present, I think there is no better truck combination for LDP than a front Bennett + an Airflow/Split, Seismic, or Tracker rear. But a few recent developments (including taking some vacation) got me thinking about detailing the specific criteria when testing trucks "for LDP" especially.

Over the last few months, I've been testing out Seismic rears after having spent several years using Splitfires, in an effort to find a truck alternative that performs well but doesn't require having to fork out another $100 to do so. And the recent release of Grombiz truck prototypes with John's hooking them up on the Galac LDP board, have gotten me intrigued about trying out another truck innovation that seems promising. And then there's always that distant notion that we might actually machine something ourselves...biggest issue is having an abundance of free time for a dedicated effort like that.

Testing vs. Review

The purpose of Testing is typically to ensure that the product being tested satisfies the requirements under which it was created. As far as something as new and niche as LDP is concerned, there really have never been "requirements" laid out, to develop a new truck around. So we have to approach this by testing whatever is thrown into the skateboard truck market, and narrow down to the ones that just so happen to work -- and isolate the reasons why.

The focus of Testing is to isolate points of weakness or failure, and to report this in a constructive vein. Test reporting does not have to be considered negative, it just needs to be interpreted from a rider's expectations.

For LDP, those expectations (a.k.a. high-level requirements) boil down to this: the pumping should be effortless, and the setup be light, durable, and adjustable.

Highlighting all the positive points from riding and testing prototypes comes into play more as you move from Testing, into Review.

Baseline

It's good to find something that's comfortable and works for you, and to stick with it, and get decently skilled on it, before moving on to something else. This helps establish a standard to test and compare against.

The "baseline" setups I put the most pumping mileage on over the years go something like this:

2001--2004 - Randal 150 front and rear
2005--2006 - Carver CX system
2006--2008 - Bennett front, Splitfire / Tracker rear

Variables

The list is endless, and results can be somewhat subjective, making "controlled testing" a difficult goal in LDP. In slalom truck testing, there is a start line, a finish line, a distinct number of cones, and XX.XXX seconds to get through them. In that case, a timing system is the most objective way to gauge performance -- and the distance between cones is the most objective measure of how easy or difficult a truck makes it through the course.

The Cyber Mile might be considered one of the most objective ways to gauge, test, and re-design any single component. Compared with a cross-country skateboarding experience, the Mile is simply a sprint, so what works for 4 minutes of riding may not translate up to the 12-hour ride. But you've got to start somewhere, and I think the Mile is pretty optimal for that.

So assuming you've chosen a testing ground, the main thing you're gauging is the overall, holistic performance of the truck. But breaking down the elements later, and evaluating why XX truck is working particularly well -- for you -- might be related to any of the following:

-- Bushing (or spring) quality. The most dramatic element you can usually tweak.
-- Hangar width. Personal preference and pumping style plays a large part in choosing this.
-- Height from ground to top of deck. Not so crucial once you're pumping the board, but pretty important when you consider cross-country distances and how often you'll need to push.
-- "Flex" of the truck. Typically you want to combine a stiffer truck setup with a flexier deck, and a loose, surfy truck setup with a more rigid deck.

Now on to the actual testing...

=================================

Test1:

The first trial is a "smoke" test -- whether that's testing deck, wheels, trucks, bushings, or bearings.

This is a 10-15 minute non-stop ride, a quick few spins around the neighborhood, and pumping around in circles in the Elk's Lodge parking lot, a perfectly smooth asphalt mecca just down the street. Sometimes they kick me out, so the scientific method is briefly put on hold.

The terrain in my hood (a.k.a. test parameters) ranges from rough to butter smooth surface, and includes flat, incline, and one fairly steep grade to check stability at speed.

The initial criteria is somewhat holistic:
- Does the setup make non-stop flatland pumping relatively effortless?
- Does the setup give back enough life, spring, response?

If not, then it's back to the garage to tweak whatever needs tweaking. For trucks, that's usually just bushings or riser angles. Sometimes a truck that works with a stiff deck doesn't feel much good at all on a flexy deck, and vice-versa, and you have to decide whether that's worth testing out -- considering the time of tearing apart your setup and putting together another.

If I'm convinced that tweaking isn't going to make the setup more efficient for LDP, then it's time to work on what would need to change, which means reporting back in detail to a builder if you're not building something on your own.

Once the setup feels good on the short ride, then it's on to a "cross-country" commute test.

Test2: Ride quality, durability, adjustability

12.5 miles into work, with a range of smooth to nasty terrain and a long, decent incline followed by a slight decline that gets up between 15--20mph.

Ride Questions / Criteria:
- Is the pumping as effort-free as possible? (flat and uphill pumping)
- Does a long stretch of rough terrain shake anything loose?
- Is the full range of motion smooth or jerky?
- Do the trucks rattle, creak, squeak, or make any other noise?
- Do you feel road vibrations, and is that from the truck, or something else like wheels / deck?
- Could the setup take on more speed and still feel stable?

Hardware Questions / Criteria:
- Are the bushings / springs easy to adjust for subtle tension change?
- Are the bushings / springs easy to switch out, if needed? Especially when out on the road?
- Are axle widths adjustable or are other widths available?
- Is angling all done through risers or are there baseplate mods possible?
- Which parts wear down the fastest?
- Do any critical parts fail after 10 miles, 50 miles, 500++ miles? (kingpins, axles, things that would send you to the ground)
- What is the maximum weight of rider supported, and is that being fully tested?
- How light can a rider be, and still make the trucks work well?
- Does the action of the truck require high risers, that make the deck unacceptably high for occasional stretches of pushing?

Test3: Speed

Simple test, but essential for cross-country treks: speed and stability on hills. In other words

- How fast can you go before you feel the need to footbrake.
- How stable is the ride while you're footbraking.

Everyone's criteria will vary on this one the most, since everyone has their own take on risk. Mine is pretty conservative. I want the board to get up to 25-30mph and still feel solid, with no sense of impending wobbles. Keeping an edge is key. I'll bomb straight down the hill until about 20mph, then start a slow, gradual turn from side to side, always maintaining an edge, just like snowboarding fast downhill. You'll want to test out footbraking in stages, as you build speed, so you aren't taken by surprise!

Test4: Long-term effort and expenditure

The aftermath. This is really a series of questions that come from the 2nd test, but the most important:

- After a couple hours of solid riding, how does your body feel?
- How much did you exert yourself to make that same long distance?
- Is your body "paying for it" in any new muscle groups? And is that a good feeling, one you think you could learn to sustain for far longer distances / periods of time?

This could mean a subtle adjustment in your technique is necessary to make it work, it doesn't necessarily mean the setup isn't right. But it might not lead you to a "slam dunk" review either.

Normally, if a setup still feels good after getting through Test2, I'll ride my commute in both directions, 25 miles a day for a few days in a row, to see how I feel accumulating distance, the overall exhaustion level. Usually it will be physically obvious the night before, whether the next morning's commute will be by board or by bus.

Summary

Testing for LDP takes time, and clocking a lot of distance. And it should.
The last thing I want to do is go for a 50-mile, out-and-back ride on a Saturday morning, that accidentally ends at the 25-mile point, without a car or public bus in sight. This is what used to happen when I was breaking kingpins on Randals, until I started carrying an increasingly heavier tool kit.

I'll keep coming back and adding more questions and criteria as this goes.

=================================

Past experiments

=================================

A quick look at some trucks that went through the LDP ringer, and reasons why they didn't quite make the top of the list.

Original trucks - springs give a really nice surfy, pumpy ride. The problems arose after hitting 10--20 miles and the baseplates crack. Requires frequent checking and tightening to prevent. Supposedly there are now newer springs available to make the rear stiffer than the front.

Radikals - when well dialed, the effortless pump is like no other, but riding over cracks and bumps weakens or loosens the kingpins fast, which
leads to instant failure and eating asphalt for dinner. Great for slalom courses, not so much for LDP.

Carver CX - more stable and returns more energy than the C7, but it simply ate through bushings too fast.

Carver C7 - a super-fun slasher and awesome for shredding circles in parking lots non-stop... but is it really a great LDP truck? For the long haul, I'd have to say no -- it takes a lot of your effort for what it returns. And it would be ultra-sketchy on the steeper hills of a true cross-country trek.

RTR Rail to Rail trucks -- feel somewhat like the Carver C7, but with a slightly simpler design and debateably a better return to center. Only downsides were, seriously sketchy at any speed past 20mph, and the springs were breaking after 25 miles or so, although we were working closely together to solve this issue.

Tracker RTX front truck -- no matter how well dialed, just sucks too much energy over the long haul. Maybe a good front for the cyber mile? But definitely not for marathon-length pumps.

Seismic front truck with bone-white springs -- not enough play in the front. The mechanical return to center still saps too much energy for the long haul. Will the softer springs be reissued some day, like the original silver springs? Come on, Dan!

Uptrucks all-urethane hangars -- too stiff, not adjustable, and once they tear (and I have no doubt they'd tear), time for a whole new truck. I will admit, this is not a heavily tested opinion, as I didn't really test these much at all. Just rode LongboardLarry's up and down the block a few times, a "mini smoke test" of sorts, and didn't feel they needed much more attention than that. They didn't pass the hardware test to start with - no changeable, adjustable bushings on the road.

Bennett "rubber" bushings -- gave these the full college try. Just couldn't get enough return, though I love the truk.

Bullwings

just currious, how did the Randal 150 compare to the Bennett 5.0s in terms of stability?

I'm currently running the Randal 125 up front, and like the feel of it - it definitely has the ease of pump with my current combo of venom bushings and wedging. I'm don't know how it'll hold up over the long term. It seems fine right now, but i don't have that many miles on it right now - probably only 10-15 miles max on it with my current Century setup (i've been snowboarding a lot more lately).