As much as I like to disagree with JW, I think he's got a solid point WRT upper body strength. Casual observation tells me that many/majority of mtb'ers (and most other sport/activity participants) suffer from the plight of really only doing the one activity and thus having a relatively poor balance of muscular strength and endurance. In fact, constantly participating in only one activity leads to imbalances that can be detrimental to performance.
At a cost of say $450+tax (as mentioned below), imho most mtb'ers would be far better off spending that money on a gym membership and some personal training sessions with someone who has a solid idea about the physical demands of mtb'ing. Or even getting some private coaching on riding skills. The problem with both of those however is that there is a requirement for the rider to actually put effort into the training program and then maintain it. In today's world of let's find ways to make things easier for ourselves, I don't know if the end result would sway in the favour of a strength or skills training program or a spring inside your frame, but I would state a professional opinion that the money spent on some quality training would be more beneficial to most rider's performance and far more beneficial to their overall quality of quality of life in the case of a strength training program.
If pro-riders adopt this en masse because they ride faster with it (placebo effect or real world benefits???) then there could be some merit for the avg member of the riding public in terms of riding perf. But again, I would still argue for spending that cash on other things like fitness training or bike skills training. Either way, I'm sure there are enough people with the cash who are willing to spend it on this thing to make it worthwhile for the manufacturer to sell it and increase profits even if it is doing absolutely nothing for the end user.
It's the age of zero-integrity manufacturing that we live in; it doesn't matter if a thing actually works or what the enviro costs might be, if it makes a company profit they'll sell it. Less can definitely be more.
Oct. 29, 2022, 1:06 p.m. - Mark
As much as I like to disagree with JW, I think he's got a solid point WRT upper body strength. Casual observation tells me that many/majority of mtb'ers (and most other sport/activity participants) suffer from the plight of really only doing the one activity and thus having a relatively poor balance of muscular strength and endurance. In fact, constantly participating in only one activity leads to imbalances that can be detrimental to performance. At a cost of say $450+tax (as mentioned below), imho most mtb'ers would be far better off spending that money on a gym membership and some personal training sessions with someone who has a solid idea about the physical demands of mtb'ing. Or even getting some private coaching on riding skills. The problem with both of those however is that there is a requirement for the rider to actually put effort into the training program and then maintain it. In today's world of let's find ways to make things easier for ourselves, I don't know if the end result would sway in the favour of a strength or skills training program or a spring inside your frame, but I would state a professional opinion that the money spent on some quality training would be more beneficial to most rider's performance and far more beneficial to their overall quality of quality of life in the case of a strength training program. If pro-riders adopt this en masse because they ride faster with it (placebo effect or real world benefits???) then there could be some merit for the avg member of the riding public in terms of riding perf. But again, I would still argue for spending that cash on other things like fitness training or bike skills training. Either way, I'm sure there are enough people with the cash who are willing to spend it on this thing to make it worthwhile for the manufacturer to sell it and increase profits even if it is doing absolutely nothing for the end user. It's the age of zero-integrity manufacturing that we live in; it doesn't matter if a thing actually works or what the enviro costs might be, if it makes a company profit they'll sell it. Less can definitely be more.