slyder

Member
Jul 29, 2003
15
0
i have had the same question about this subject. i talked to some guys i race with and learned alot. the scotts is more expensive, has more nonservicable parts,and needs to be sent off once a year for calibration. the gpr has six moving parts cost about half the scotts, and you dont need to send in off every year. they said the guy at gpr was real nice and answered all their questions. to me it sounds like the gpr is the way to go. i'm going to put one on my bike soon. need money first. hope this helps.
 

JCW

~SPONSOR~
Jan 23, 2003
333
0
Regardless of moving parts and service, the one to buy is the one that works and keeps working. In checking, I've heard numerous complaints (many on this forum) about the WER going bad after a year or so and not being able to be fixed.

My experience with GPR was not so good. When I talked with them they were very arrogant and really didn't care if I bought one or not. I called Scotts and they were super nice and took about 20 minutes explaining all of my options regarding fat bars, front or rear mounting, and computer mounting, etc. I bought the Scotts and I love it.

I will say that I have heard only good things about the GPR also. I had two main concerns about the GPR. It can't be turned off and it only has 6 or 7 settings. My Scotts has over 20 settings and it can be turned off in super tight woods with lots of turns. Also, the GPR requires that you raise your handlebars about 1 1/2" and I did not want to do that.

After all of that confusion, I recommend the Scotts or GPR. I haven't heard anything bad about either and I think your mounting decision will probably decide which one since there is less than $100 difference depending on options selected (about $ 500/Scotts vs $ 400/GPR). You can't go wrong with either of these two.

Just my two cents worth-
JCW
 

gwhII

Member
Mar 31, 2003
238
0
Howdy,

After reading this thread and other earlier ones in the archives, I'm wanting to find out if the Scotts triple clamp kit is that much stronger/better made/more adjustable than keeping the stock triple clamp and installing barclamps that accept a stabilizer. In either case, I want to use oversize bars.

I'm actually leaning towards the GPR because I like the one large knob instead of the two smaller knobs (the left Scotts knob bothers me because it looks like it could catch on something with that point), simpler internal design (less to wear out and easier repair), the lifetime warranty versus $35/shot and the GPR being $100+ dollars cheaper.

Somebody talk me into the Scotts. :-)

Thanks,
Greg
 

JCW

~SPONSOR~
Jan 23, 2003
333
0
All I can say is that the Scotts (in heavy mountain rocks) took me from 1st & 2nd gear to 4th & 5th gear with a totally fun and relaxing ride. I don't know if the triple clamp is cut different to make the bar clamp fit the frame mount or what. It doesn't really look any stronger to me. Regarding the design, as long as you don't go over the bars it shouldn't matter. If you do, that will probably be one of your smaller concerns.

I think you will be pleased with the GPR or the Scotts. The Scotts allows you to run big bars and keep the same height. The GPR will raise your bar height about 2", which would allow you to lower your bike if you needed to.

One final warning. If you get used to one you will never want to ride without one again. That's a problem because now I want one on my other bike. Does it ever end???
 

gwhII

Member
Mar 31, 2003
238
0
Thanks for the info JCW. How long have you had your damper? The $35/servicing may not be a bad deal if it is only every couple of years. And, no, I don't think it ever ends. :-)

Best,
Greg
 

JCW

~SPONSOR~
Jan 23, 2003
333
0
I bought it last winter. Several of the guys I ride with have had a Scotts since they started selling them. One guy I ride with has transferred his to three bikes and it still works great. I am not aware of any problems with any of them. The GPR must be good from all I am hearing, but it does not offer the level of fine tuning or tweaking that the Scotts does. The WERs seem to have a problem of not being able to return them to like new performance, even if WER rebuilds the unit.

I think you will be fine with the Scotts or the GPR. I'm just sold on the Scotts based on what I have seen it do for me. It's a tough call!

JCW
 

BRush

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jun 5, 2000
1,100
0
Originally posted by JCW
.The WERs seem to have a problem of not being able to return them to like new performance, even if WER rebuilds the unit.
.


I think the WER is getting a bad rap here. I have never heard of that problem, and I've had my WER rebuilt twice in the three seasons I've ridden and raced with it. Each time the performance was indeed restored to like new. It's a fairly popular damper here in the Northeast and if there was a chronic problem like that, word would have gotten around. I have both a Scotts and a WER damper. The WER is good damper and has always performed well. In fact for tight technical terrain, I'd give it a slight nod over the Scotts because I notice it less. The Scotts I like a smidgen better at higher speed stuff. If you get the impression that I don't see a huge difference between them when it comes to the basic function: save my butt when I take an unexpected hit on the front wheel, you'd be right. The difference between the Scotts and the WER (and I suspect, the GPR) is much less than the difference between a damper and no damper.
 

JCW

~SPONSOR~
Jan 23, 2003
333
0
BRush,

Thanks for the info. It's good to hear positive comments about the WER. I have nothing against the WER, other than quiet a few negative comments from WER users and from one used 01 KTM 200 I was considering buying as a backup (that had a WER that did not work). I don't know why, but they have had problems down here where others seem to be fairly bullet proof.

Above all, I will definitely agree that any damper is better than no damper at all.
 

skipro3

Mod Ban
Dec 14, 2002
902
0
I have a WER as well. I suspect that once users start getting used to the fact that they can go faster, they find they need to crank in more dampning to handle the higher speed hits. This may be interpreted as wearing out or failing. I think one user here tried changing to a thicker oil to get a stiffer dampning effect. I am finding that I am cranking in more on mine too as I pick up the pace; but I feel that it still works fine and I am riding much, much quicker now than even 6 months ago.
It is a great unit and even if I did "wear it out", and it couldn't be rebuilt back to new, I would replace it with another WER. It would be worth the cost to replace it every other year or so, I find it that beneficial. That would come to about $150 a year and that ain't bad compared to, for example, how much I spend on fresh tires in the same time.
 

gwhII

Member
Mar 31, 2003
238
0
JCW, I'll post what I end up with. Right now I'm still leaning towards the GPR because it is quite a bit cheaper and I haven't really found any negative comments. I still have other parts that I want to buy like a pipe, RB carb, etc, and am on a budget. I really would think about the Scotts if they would offer an OS bar kit with just replacement barclamps. I'm going to give them a call and see if there's a technical reason why they only offer the OS bar kit with a triple clamp.

The WER is not an option because I am in the process of doing my suspension and decided that since I weigh about 230 that I would add the SRC fork brace. I think that the mounting bracket would interfere with the brace clearances.

Best,
Greg
 

BRush

LIFETIME SPONSOR
Jun 5, 2000
1,100
0
Originally posted by Braahp
hehe I thought it was just me. I've got mine at about 1/2 turn out now.

The teflon wiper is a wear part and as time goes by, you'll find that you have to crank the adjuster in further to get the same damping. If you have WER do the rebuild, the center post with the teflon wiper is the main part part they inspect and replace. WER sends back the old post along with the rebuilt damper so you can see it yourself. Based on the wear on mine, I could have let it go longer. If you race, having it rebuilt yearly is a good idea. If you trail ride, then once every two years would be fine (but I'd at least change the oil yearly).
 

jruggery

Member
Apr 6, 2003
54
0
The new Dirt Rider (Jan '04) has a test of the Scotts, WER, GPR and RTT
stabilizers. They are admittedly a west coast rag, but they give some good
insight as to which they feel would work better in eastern woods. Also good
info on the pros and cons of each. You should check it out before you buy.
 

gwhII

Member
Mar 31, 2003
238
0
JR, thanks for the heads up. I checked last night and the Jan Dirt Rider should be on the stands in the next couple days.

JCW, not confusing at all. :-) I figured it's kinda of like a Ford/Chevy/Dodge preference. I don't think I'll really go wrong with either choice. I'm going to get the Jan Dirt Rider to read their thoughts and give Scotts a call to find out why they only offer a replacement triple clamp OS bar kit. I still may go that route because I do like the idea of being able to move the damper from this bike to the next bike.

Best,
Greg
 

Braahp

~SPONSOR~
Jan 20, 2001
641
0
I just wish the W.E.R offered more resistance. I'm not sure I buy into what they say "if you can feel it when on a stand its too stiff". Everyone...I mean everyone around here with the Scotts or GPR has there's so tight you can barely even turn the bars. Maybe they just have way too much dampening going on. I can see this beneficial in high speed but it would wear me out in the tight stuff. Mine seems mighty loose compared to the others but it works awesome. Could it be better or is less more? Anyone had both on their KDX?
 

ktmracer

~SPONSOR~
Aug 9, 1999
378
0
I currently run a GPR and my buddy runs a Scotts. the differences i have seen: Scotts, larger range of adjustment (btw, the gpr has more than 7 adjustments, the #'s on the dial go up to six, but that is only for reference) also, the Scotts only damps the movement of the bars when they are moving away from the center of the bike. if they are returning to "center" there is no damping. The GPR unit is damped the both ways. I dont' know about the 400 dollar price on the GPR, i bought mine with the top clamp, post (bolt on), and damper for 275.00. i like the large dial on the GPR (easy to to tell what setting you are on) as opposed to the dial on the scotts. i have alot of fun cranking down on my buddies adjuster when he isn't looking. you cant go wrong with either one, since i ride in the eastern woods (read slow speed stuff), the GPR suits me just fine, as the higher (stiffer) settings on the scotts would do me no good.
 

KDXNick

~SPONSOR~
Oct 15, 2002
53
0
I have thought about running a damper, but the Scotts seems a bit pricey and I'm worried about crash dammage with the WER (I tend to slide into trees on occasion when racing). Does anyone have this type of problem with their WER? I'd love one, but can't afford smashing $300 into a tree.
Thanks,
-Nick
 

gwhII

Member
Mar 31, 2003
238
0
Thanks for all the help and information. I finally decided that I could live without the OS bars and will add some bark busters to the new Renthal 7/8 Scotts Bend handlebar. And as the bend implies, I went with the Scotts. Ordered it today so I should have it in the next week or so. From what I read here, on the net, and in the rags, it seems that most people rated them as the best. If I decide that I want OS bars later, I'll buy one of the BRP barclamp kits then.

Best,
Greg
 
Top Bottom