Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - Bike Weight - how much and does it matter?

I was curious how much your bikes weigh. I ride a 57.5 cm Cyclocross bike (Van Dessel Hole Shot) with an aluminum frame, carbon fork and Shimano 105 components. All-in, including pedals, it's about 22 lbs.

Also - for those of you who switched from a "heavier" bike to a "lighter" one - did you notice a difference, or is it really the engine that counts?

Thanks in advance for any replies.

I find it only matters when you cross some significant weight boundaries. Like, if you go from a 45 lb beach cruiser to a 30 lb 1970's 10-speed, you notice it. If you go from the 30 lb 10-speed to a 23-25 lb steel road bike, you notice the difference. If you manage to go down another 10 lbs from that, you notice (but it still doesn't make that much difference in actual riding). But I'm a lightweight. Since you're posting in Clydesdales, you weigh so much more than the bike that it's guaranteed not to make much difference at all.

It really only makes a difference if you have to carry it somewhere or push it very far...

Also the lighter the bike the lighter the pocketbook.

IN our weight group, the weight of the bikes doesn't matter that much.

I was curious how much your bikes weigh.

Funny you should ask. Curiosity got the better of me the other day and I weighed both my Trek 1000 (alpha) and my 20 yr old ridged frame Rock Hopper. The Trek came in at 24 lb with seat bag and water bottle, and the RockHopper came in at 32 lb with lights, seat bag and water bottle.

As far as feeling a difference sprints and loading into the pickup are the two main places I feel it.

I suspect that a lot of the difference people notice is less a function of weight than of design. Lighter bikes tend to also have a more agressive frame geometry. This leads to a more efficient pedal stroke (more power goes to the rear wheel) and often quicker handling. So a light bike may "feel" faster, and even be faster, but it's less a functino of weight than of design.

I try not to let the weight weenie hype get to me. The way I see it, I'm better off taking the weight of my frame before taking it off my bicycle's frame. That's where I'll most likely see significant performance improvements.

Besides I can't really see my 230 lbs. frame on a bike that weighs in at the same weight as a pair of ladies thong underwear.

I think KOTTS has it pretty close. We may feel faster on a lighter bike. I know I am faster on my road bike compared to my mountain or comfort bike, but they are different bikes for different types of riding. I could probably ride a carbon fibre Jamis and not notice any difference other than I might feel faster. I weigh too much to make a noticable difference. When I am at 5% body fat, then maybe worry about the weight of the bike and components. So, in other words I am not planning on worrying about the weight of the bike or the weight of the components.

Going from 22lbs to a sub 20 bike will not make much of a difference for you. If you want some more speed out of your cross bike toss the knobs and change the tires to 700 x 23's. Asides from the road bike being lighter and in a more aggressive riding possition, the gearing and crank size has a lot to do with it.

Still, it's much cheaper for the rider to loose a pound than it is for the bicycle to do the same. Spit a few times before you jump on, that's good for a couple grams.

It is fairly cheap to get a bike in the 22 to 23 pound range. I've got a 1985 Trek 460 that is in that range which I purchased for $45. I've also got a couple of touring bikes that are about 5 pounds heavier than the Trek 460, and I don't really notice that much difference in terms of the weight. Going from 22 pounds to 15 pounds on the bike would cost me a few thousand dollars. In comparison, I lost about 25 pounds in the last 8 months just watching my diet and exercising. Way more bang for the buck getting a lighter engine, and in any case if I took 25 pounds off my bike weight, I'd be riding a bike that weighed in at negative 3 pounds.

I went from a Trek FX hybrid to my Long Haul Trucker, and the LHT definitely feels (and is) faster. The LHT also probably is in the 30 pound range with empty panniers, daily load is probably more like 35. It's heavy, but efficent, and oh so smooth.

My Hardrock is light like whoa when I put the "summer" slicks on it, I notice that it's faster to get moving and to lift, but beyond that it's negligible.

I went from a 23lb 1993 Trek race bike to a 16lb 2008 Cervelo RS. I bought the Cervelo primarily because it was a lot more comfortable than my old bike, but was curious as to whether the reduced weight would make any difference in my riding. To me, the Cervelo just feels faster, especially when climbing hills. My bike computer would seem to confirm this: my average speed has gone up by 2.5-3mph. Obviously, that's not a huge change, but it is noticeable...

In my opinion a 2.5 to 3 mph speed increase is huge. The last time I saw that type of jump was my first month of riding last year, when I went from a 9 mph average to a 12. All that was on my mountain bike (which is about 35 pounds). I gradually built up to 14 over the next several months until I got my road bike (which is about 23 pounds). With the road bike I jumped about 1 mph average. In the last 9 months since then, I have increased about 2.5 more. Most of this speed increase was due to the fact that I lost 75 pounds during that time frame.


I went from a 23lb 1993 Trek race bike to a 16lb 2008 Cervelo RS. I bought the Cervelo primarily because it was a lot more comfortable than my old bike, but was curious as to whether the reduced weight would make any difference in my riding. To me, the Cervelo just feels faster, especially when climbing hills. My bike computer would seem to confirm this: my average speed has gone up by 2.5-3mph. Obviously, that's not a huge change, but it is noticeable...

Of course it matters.

The question really is:

"How much does it matter to you?" or even, "How much is it worth to you?"

Let me illustrate. Would a bike weight of 75 lbs. be a lot? Could we tell the difference between that and a 17 lb. bike? Of course we could. Weight does matter. Can we feel the weight differences? In this extreme example, yes. But if the difference is only 1 or 2 lbs, this might be too small to actually feel. That doesn't mean it's not there. It is there and it does actually require us to put out more effort--even if we can't tell. It all comes down to degrees... er... pounds. :D

That being said, there is another factor to consider:

How much weight-reduction is too much? At which point is the lighter material/bike too fragile?
The best example for us clydes is wheels. But there are others. When the LBS sold me my bike, they asked if I wanted a carbon handlebar & stem. I said, "No." I felt that the reduction in durability/reliability of the bar was not worth the extra expense ($$$). Plus, I figured, if I wanted to reduce the bike system's weight--rider, machine, and everything we carry with it--by another 4 ozs., I could just go to the bathroom before riding. :D

And perhaps the final follow-up question is:

"Is the $2,000 you'd pay for a minor weight reduction worth it to you?"
Well, if you have the money, and it makes no difference to you, go ahead. Have fun. It's your money.

I was curious how much your bikes weigh. I ride a 57.5 cm Cyclocross bike (Van Dessel Hole Shot) with an aluminum frame, carbon fork and Shimano 105 components. All-in, including pedals, it's about 22 lbs.

Also - for those of you who switched from a "heavier" bike to a "lighter" one - did you notice a difference, or is it really the engine that counts?

Thanks in advance for any replies.

Both weight and tires can effect performance. In my case I have two bikes.
1. Commuter: Gary Fisher Nirvanna (about 33 Lbs naked). Add to that fenders, rack, pannier bags, generator hub up front. Two sets of lights up front, two light in the back. Now add my daily commute load of clothing, lunch (including food, drinks [2 water bottles, 1 thermos with milk], fuit), etc. I also use a handlebar bag to carry personal items such as wallet, and it has tools to fix just about any problem, spare tire, some maps of the area, etc. Total weight when I leave the house is close to 65 Lbs including the Nokia W016 winter tires. The ride home is noticably easier as I've eaten the food, and consumed all the liquids. Its amazing how quickly those things add up.

2. Road bike: '06 LeMond Buenos Aires (part carbon fiber, part high strength steel). This bike weighs about 20 Lbs naked. All I usually take with me are two water bottles and the handlebar bag. Fully loaded it is under 30 Lbs.

I've been riding on my Nokia Winter tires since October. I had my rear wheel blow a spoke last week so I "had" to ride my road bike instead. Luckily the weather was fantastic and the road salt was pretty much gone from the road. I felt like I was flying. Acceleration was stunning, and I could cruise at speeds I haven't experienced on over half a year. In this case the engine is the same on either bike, but the weight or the bike, the MUCH more efficient tires, and the higher spec components on the road bike.

My average speed on the commuter with the Winter tires is in the 13 to 14 MPH for my 10 mile RT commute.

My average speed on the commuter with the Summer tires (Bontrager Hard Case 32mm) is around 15 to 16 MPH for the same commute

My average speed on the Road bike on the same commute using the same Bontrager Hard Case tires, but in a narrower 25mm version. I do travel much lighter on the road bike. My average speed on my commute is around 18 to 19 MPH.

Some days I have traveled lighter in this hybrid commuter bike, and I don't recall being much faster. I will accelerate a little faster, but over all top average speed won't be affected very much. I have the handlebars pretty much level with the seat on both bikes. With the road bike using the brake hoods as my normal riding position I will be slightly more aerodynamic, but exactly how much better I do not know. I rarely ues the drops during my commute so that position does not come into play.

The engine matters a great deal (if you compare one rider to an other), but in this case I am the same engine in each of the three instances. The road bike is clearly much faster, but I can't tell exactly how much of that difference is due to narrower tires (25mm), higher quality bearing (also no generator hub), higher quality drive train components, or lower weight. All that being said, I doubt the average speed would increase much from going from a Cyclocross bike that weighs 22 Lbs to a higher end road bike that weighs 17 Lbs.

Happy riding,
André

I was curious how much your bikes weigh. I ride a 57.5 cm Cyclocross bike (Van Dessel Hole Shot) with an aluminum frame, carbon fork and Shimano 105 components. All-in, including pedals, it's about 22 lbs.

Also - for those of you who switched from a "heavier" bike to a "lighter" one - did you notice a difference, or is it really the engine that counts?

Thanks in advance for any replies.

When you look at bike weight, there is a sweet spot, around 22lbs (10kg), the cost goes up very quickly when you get below this level, for example a 19lb bike is roughly 3 times the cost of a 22lb bike, and a 16lb bike is three times that. Also realise that as the weight goes down so does the durability, when you get below this point. Yeah a 16lb bike would be nice, but the cost is very high and not everyone can afford to employ a full time mechanic. This is why most bikes in that range are owned by racing teams who do employ mechanics.

Now here is some other math, we get 3 times the cost for 3 lbs, now you need to figure out that with a 210lb rider and 22lb bike, reducing the total by 3lbs is going to be 1.3% of the total weight. If you can reduce by 10% of the weight of the "engine" then, you gain almost the entire weight of the bicycle. Now the condition of the engine is also a huge factor, if the legs are in poor condition, then you can't push high gears, and when you don't push high gears, speed suffers.

Now it all comes down to riding style, there are guys here who go on tour, 225lb rider, 40lbs of gear, 35lb bicycle, total weight 300lbs, they use lower gears, never go very fast, but do manage to cover a lot of ground, setting up camp each night in a different place. Something I would like to explore....

I took two bikes to a race one day. One for a cat5 race and one for a masters 30+ 4/5 race.
One bike was a 1993 italian steel race bike with 700x23c tires weighing in at about 25lbs, the other one a Trek Madone 5.2 also with 700x23c tires weighing in a little over 18lbs.
Didn't make a lick of a difference, got dropped during both races and averaged about 20mph on the same track at the same day.

I was curious how much your bikes weigh. I ride a 57.5 cm Cyclocross bike (Van Dessel Hole Shot) with an aluminum frame, carbon fork and Shimano 105 components. All-in, including pedals, it's about 22 lbs.

Also - for those of you who switched from a "heavier" bike to a "lighter" one - did you notice a difference, or is it really the engine that counts?

Thanks in advance for any replies.

I just love comments in magazines about how piggish a bike is when it weighs 20 lbs. Not too many years ago, 20 lbs was a world class racing bicycle weight:eek: A really good road bike weighed in at around 25 lbs.

The ride home is noticably easier as I've eaten the food, and consumed all the liquids. Its amazing how quickly those things add up.
André

Unless you take a 5lb dump at the turn around, the easier ride home is probably from the nutritioanl benefits of the food :)

I don't think a weight difference is noticable just riding a long, but if you were in a group sprint I think you would definitely notice it.
Even a modest hill that you are struggling up, if you jumped on a 5-10 lb lighter bike I think you would be surprised how much easier the climb becomes.
If you were grinding on a long flat straight the heavier bike would probably be better because the weight helps to maintain momentum (especially heavier wheels once you get them up to speed).

However 95% of most riding it probably wouldn't make much difference.

When you look at bike weight, there is a sweet spot, around 22lbs (10kg), the cost goes up very quickly when you get below this level, for example a 19lb bike is roughly 3 times the cost of a 22lb bike, and a 16lb bike is three times that. Also realise that as the weight goes down so does the durability, when you get below this point. Yeah a 16lb bike would be nice, but the cost is very high and not everyone can afford to employ a full time mechanic. This is why most bikes in that range are owned by racing teams who do employ mechanics.

This is a lot of baloney. A 16lb bike costs 9X more than a 22lb bike? And requires a full-time mechanic? Can you quote any credible source to back-up any of the claims you've made here? I'd be particularly interested if you could show that light-weight bikes are less reliable than heavier bikes. My experience tends to suggest that heavy bikes with low-end components tend to require much more maintenance than light bikes with top-end components.

I'm about 220 pounds and I think that stronger parts weigh a little more so I can live with that.
My 1990 steel Schwinn weighs about 25 pounds empty.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3210/2518418211_303c1d41f4.jpg

IN our weight group, the weight of the bikes doesn't matter that much.

Yeah this is the clyde forum... doesn't really matter if your bike weighs 3 ounces less than mine if you weigh 100 lbs more than me. Weight matters to those little skinny guys. To us, lose 5 pounds off your body then really note a difference! ;)

BTW a 22 # bike is pretty light. I would think anything else would be way too light for you.

My friends and I always laugh - I have fairly light road and mountain bikes... of course I need to lose 50#, and I tend to ride with an overpacked hydration pack, half the time which weighs 20 #'s is what is the point of having a light bike? :o

Bike weight is only a psychological factor - at least for us, I guess.

This is a lot of baloney.


Amen Brother!:thumb:

Back to point.

I've been thinking about this a lot since I saw the question posted. Weight on the bike both does and does not matter. It depends on where the weight is. Heavy wheels slow you down. No doubt about it. But if you trade too much on the weight vs. strength, you lose out. So there is a fine line there.

Bearings matter. So quality hubs and BB will help a lot. Incidentally, quality hubs are usually light. Go figure? Those 3 things can make a big difference.

Stiffness of the frame matters. A frame that is soft (like my Bianchi) will climb and ride like a slug, while a stiff, responsive frame will be much easier to get going and keep going. But if you go too stiff, your fillings will rattle out.

Stiff cranks matter. The softer they are, the more energy goes into bending of the crank arms rather than into the drivetrain.

All of it is on a fine line between not enough and too much.

With these things in mind, you can do very well for not too much money if you shop around and buy used. If you buy new, it can get expensive quick.

Bottom line is to buy the best tool for the job. And enjoy the heck out of it. If you're happy with your equipment, then the rest is gravy.

My bike is heavy. I'm slow. I like to think if only my bike was lighter, I would be just like Lance Armstrong. Please don't spoil this illusion.

This is a lot of baloney. A 16lb bike costs 9X more than a 22lb bike? And requires a full-time mechanic? Can you quote any credible source to back-up any of the claims you've made here? I'd be particularly interested if you could show that light-weight bikes are less reliable than heavier bikes. My experience tends to suggest that heavy bikes with low-end components tend to require much more maintenance than light bikes with top-end components.

Why do people only read part of what I write, then stop reading and start off on a tangent that has little to do with the rest of what I wrote :rolleyes:.

Sure a 45lb bike with crappy components is going to be unreliable. That's not what I meant. I guess maybe some people do not know what the term sweet spot means, so let me explain. With bicycles like many other products, whether it be cameras, computers, cars even. Cheap products are typically low quality, and quality generally improves as you go up in price at a relatively consistent rate, up to a point, beyond this point, the sweet spot, prices tend to go up faster then quality does in an accelerating pattern. The smartest shoppers look to find the sweet spot and shop at that level. In road bicycles right now it's between CA$1,500 and CA$2,000 and most of them are between 22 and 24lbs.

Now let me make my second point, we can make better parts out of lighter materials to a point, but there is only so many different ways to alloy aluminum and only so many ways to design lighter parts while maintaining the same strength, beyond that, there is no way to make it lighter without making it weaker, weaker means that it's less reliable, especially when dealing with the stresses imposed by riders that are larger then the designed normal. The rules are not that different for CF,

Last time I saw a 19lb bicycle it had a CA$3,500 price tag on it, you can get some nice bikes in the 22-24lb range for CA$1,500, last time I saw a 16lb bicycle it had a price on it of CA$9.989 not quite 9 times, but close enough for union work. Also had a 165lb load limit on it, so as far as a clyde on that saddle, you might not need a full time mechanic, but you would still end up replacing a lot of expensive parts on a regular basis.......

Now let me make my second point, we can make better parts out of lighter materials to a point, but there is only so many different ways to alloy aluminum and only so many ways to design lighter parts while maintaining the same strength, beyond that, there is no way to make it lighter without making it weaker, weaker means that it's less reliable, especially when dealing with the stresses imposed by riders that are larger then the designed normal. The rules are not that different for CF,

Once again, your view is too simplistic. Yes, you can make parts lighter by making them weaker. Or you can do what the bicycle industry does: improve your engineering, materials, and manufacturing processes. None of these things stand still for very long. Parts made today can be lighter than parts made 5- or 10-years ago because of advances in design and manufacturing. Look at all the technology that has become available in the last 5-, 10-, or 15- years: CAD modeling, 5-axis CNC machining, robotic testing, finite element analysis of parts before they're manufactured, vacuum forging, X-ray inspection, carbon fiber, ceramic bearings, and a host of others. Today's parts aren't light because they're weak (though, admittedly, engineers sometimes push the limits there too), they're light because of better design and manufacturing. With the help of computer modeling and real-world testing, there's also a lot more knowledge about how parts are stressed, when they're stressed, and how much stress occurs. Thus it's possible to design a part that's suitably strong where it needs to be strong, but still relatively light.


Last time I saw a 19lb bicycle it had a CA$3,500 price tag on it, you can get some nice bikes in the 22-24lb range for CA$1,500, last time I saw a 16lb bicycle it had a price on it of CA$9.989 not quite 9 times, but close enough for union work. Also had a 165lb load limit on it, so as far as a clyde on that saddle, you might not need a full time mechanic, but you would still end up replacing a lot of expensive parts on a regular basis.......

I think you need to go shopping again... or move the the United States :D A name-brand carbon fiber bike in the 16-17lb range can be had for US$3000. A 19-20lb aluminum bike would cost about US$1500. If you're willing to buy a no-name frame and spend some time shopping for components, you can build a 15lb bike for US$3500 (US$800 Pedal Force RS2 frame, US$2200 SRAM Red build kit, US$500 Williams System 19 wheels) or less. I'll admit, the wheels have a 190lb rider weight limit and the published weights for the build add to 6300g (~14lbs). Most of the real-world builds with the same components seem to end up in the 15.0-15.5lbs range. All of the components are well-regarded, rock-solid pieces. The only things I would expect to replace on a regular basis are the chain and brake pads. Not necessarily a setup I'd recommend for a Clyde, but it just shows what can be done these days...

Once again, your view is too simplistic. Yes, you can make parts lighter by making them weaker. Or you can do what the bicycle industry does: improve your engineering, materials, and manufacturing processes. None of these things stand still for very long. Parts made today can be lighter than parts made 5- or 10-years ago because of advances in design and manufacturing. Look at all the technology that has become available in the last 5-, 10-, or 15- years: CAD modeling, 5-axis CNC machining, robotic testing, finite element analysis of parts before they're manufactured, vacuum forging, X-ray inspection, carbon fiber, ceramic bearings, and a host of others. Today's parts aren't light because they're weak (though, admittedly, engineers sometimes push the limits there too), they're light because of better design and manufacturing. With the help of computer modeling and real-world testing, there's also a lot more knowledge about how parts are stressed, when they're stressed, and how much stress occurs. Thus it's possible to design a part that's suitably strong where it needs to be strong, but still relatively light.



I think you need to go shopping again... or move the the United States :D A name-brand carbon fiber bike in the 16-17lb range can be had for US$3000. A 19-20lb aluminum bike would cost about US$1500. If you're willing to buy a no-name frame and spend some time shopping for components, you can build a 15lb bike for US$3500 (US$800 Pedal Force RS2 frame, US$2200 SRAM Red build kit, US$500 Williams System 19 wheels) or less. I'll admit, the wheels have a 190lb rider weight limit and the published weights for the build add to 6300g (~14lbs). Most of the real-world builds with the same components seem to end up in the 15.0-15.5lbs range. All of the components are well-regarded, rock-solid pieces. The only things I would expect to replace on a regular basis are the chain and brake pads. Not necessarily a setup I'd recommend for a Clyde, but it just shows what can be done these days...

You know in the last paragraph you show that your first paragraph doesn't hold water. If a lighter part is just as strong due to magical engineering as a heavier part, then why is the heavier part recommended as Clyde friendly, while the lighter part isn't? Simple because we know that under heavier loads and higher torque, the lighter part isn't as strong. It's not as strong, because the engineers have decided that lighter is better. This may be fine if one is into professional racing,

Your changing the rules, I was looking at commercially available bikes, if you hire a mechanic to build the bike up, putting it on the same footing, then that's going to add considerably to the cost, probably take him/her a couple of days, since it's built up from parts, and 16 hours at $65/hr adds over $1,000 to the cost. You also forgot the incidentals, and they can add up, bars, tape, saddle, seat post, pedals, etc. They also add to the weight and it's still not Clyde friendly, If it's not Clyde friendiy then there is no point, talking about it on a Clyde group, especially when many of those people can lose the 6lb difference in the bathroom.

You know in the last paragraph you show that your first paragraph doesn't hold water. If a lighter part is just as strong due to magical engineering as a heavier part, then why is the heavier part recommended as Clyde friendly, while the lighter part isn't? Simple because we know that under heavier loads and higher torque, the lighter part isn't as strong. It's not as strong, because the engineers have decided that lighter is better. This may be fine if one is into professional racing,

My last paragraph gives an example of a particular build that was designed to emphasize light weight and low price over any other considerations. It was specifically addressed to your ridiculous claim that a 16lb bicycle had to cost CAD$10,000. As I clearly mentioned, the wheels in that particular build had a 190lb rider weight limit. I could have used light wheels with no limit, but that would have added another $300-500 to the cost of the build. Those wheels are the only component mentioned in the entire post that aren't Clyde-friendly.


Your changing the rules, I was looking at commercially available bikes, if you hire a mechanic to build the bike up, putting it on the same footing, then that's going to add considerably to the cost, probably take him/her a couple of days, since it's built up from parts, and 16 hours at $65/hr adds over $1,000 to the cost. You also forgot the incidentals, and they can add up, bars, tape, saddle, seat post, pedals, etc. They also add to the weight and it's still not Clyde friendly, If it's not Clyde friendiy then there is no point, talking about it on a Clyde group, especially when many of those people can lose the 6lb difference in the bathroom.

You are seriously misinformed if you believe it takes 16 hours and $1000 to assemble a road bike.

I can build a bike from the frame up in about four hours and I'm not an especially good (or perhaps I should say: well-organized) mechanic. My LBS charges a flat $120 fee for building a road bike and it only takes them a couple of hours. In any event, you're right: assembling a bike yourself is so easy, it didn't occur to me to include the cost in the $3500 price I quoted. In my defense, I'll point out that it turns out Pedal Force will actually sell you everything needed to build a bike for several hundred dollars less than I quoted. And they'll refund $100 of the purchase if you FAX/e-mail them an LBS receipt for bike assembly within 30 days of receiving the parts.

FYI, I didn't forget the incidentals. While I didn't publish a complete component list, the build kit I used as an example included just about everything necessary to build a complete bike. This is why it is called a "build kit" and not an "upgrade kit" or "component gruppo". Specifically, I included prices and weight for: frame, fork, bottom bracket, brake calipers, cassette, chain, cranks, FD, RD, handlebar tape, handlebars, headset, brake/shift levers, pedals, saddle, seatpost, stem, wheels, rim strips, tires, and tubes. I'll admit, I did forget to include cables. You caught me! Add another $45 to the cost.

Oh, the CF bike I just built set me back about $650. I scavenged a bunch of parts off a 15 year old bike in the garage. Build time was about 2 hours. If I built bikes more often, it probably would have taken a lot less time. But this was my first build in something like 20 years.

The design aspect is alot of it (IE a road bike is faster because it is a road bike by design), but as you hear from all the commuters the same bike with an extra 10 lbs in the back makes a BIG diffeence too. It isn't the going a certain speed that will change it is the accelerating from stops and sudden surges which will wear you down quicker. My cruising speed is normally similar loaded versus unloaded, but my average is always less because of the extra time at lower speed while starting up (and in a fairly urban south jersey location there is alot of stopping and starting)

My CF LeMond cost about $1650. Plus $300 for Ultegra/Open Pros and wow I'm having more fun and going faster than with my AL bike. Weight makes a difference to me, I must say. And +1 to heckler on the acceleration factor.

No matter the size of the engine it is going to have to turn those cranks and get those wheels spinning... lighten those and you will see the most improvements and get the most bang for your buck.

During a lunch-time ride today, I saw my first ever DL-1 in action....which was being ridden by none other than Doohickie. I've also gotta say that Doohickie is deceptively quick on his 52 lb DL-1, even in a slight headwind.

I vote engine.

My last paragraph gives an example of a particular build that was designed to emphasize light weight and low price over any other considerations. It was specifically addressed to your ridiculous claim that a 16lb bicycle had to cost CAD$10,000. As I clearly mentioned, the wheels in that particular build had a 190lb rider weight limit. I could have used light wheels with no limit, but that would have added another $300-500 to the cost of the build. Those wheels are the only component mentioned in the entire post that aren't Clyde-friendly.



You are seriously misinformed if you believe it takes 16 hours and $1000 to assemble a road bike.

I can build a bike from the frame up in about four hours and I'm not an especially good (or perhaps I should say: well-organized) mechanic. My LBS charges a flat $120 fee for building a road bike and it only takes them a couple of hours. In any event, you're right: assembling a bike yourself is so easy, it didn't occur to me to include the cost in the $3500 price I quoted. In my defense, I'll point out that it turns out Pedal Force will actually sell you everything needed to build a bike for several hundred dollars less than I quoted. And they'll refund $100 of the purchase if you FAX/e-mail them an LBS receipt for bike assembly within 30 days of receiving the parts.

FYI, I didn't forget the incidentals. While I didn't publish a complete component list, the build kit I used as an example included just about everything necessary to build a complete bike. This is why it is called a "build kit" and not an "upgrade kit" or "component gruppo". Specifically, I included prices and weight for: frame, fork, bottom bracket, brake calipers, cassette, chain, cranks, FD, RD, handlebar tape, handlebars, headset, brake/shift levers, pedals, saddle, seatpost, stem, wheels, rim strips, tires, and tubes. I'll admit, I did forget to include cables. You caught me! Add another $45 to the cost.

You know that were really comparing apples to oranges here. I was talking a commercially available, name brand bicycle from a bricks and mortar dealer, fully assembled and road ready, in Canadian dollars. Your talking a big bag of parts from a non brand name discount mail order house, unassembled and in US dollars.

So, shall we compare apples to apples here, a 16lb commercially available name brand bike, fully assembled and road ready from a bricks and mortar shop.

A spoiler and rims can't help a car with no engine. I believe the same principle applies. You can lose 10 lbs and take a crap and you lose 33% of you bicycle weight. Just my .02

If you live on the 3rd floor of an apt, like I do. The weight matters ;)

So, shall we compare apples to apples here, a 16lb commercially available name brand bike, fully assembled and road ready from a bricks and mortar shop.

I was comparing apples to apples. You just chose to ignore it. Here's what I said:


A name-brand carbon fiber bike in the 16-17lb range can be had for US$3000. A 19-20lb aluminum bike would cost about US$1500.

The 16-17lb bicycle is a ready-to-ride Specialized Roubaix Expert sold by a local dealer in my area. Their "everyday price" on this bike is $3000. The 19-20lb aluminum bike is a ready-to-ride Fuji Roubaix Pro, sold by the local Performance Bike store for $1500.

howdy, nice to find a forum for the larger riders. that being said, heres my two cents worth of internet drivel.

with pre built wheels, a reasonable mechanic should be able to assemble a bike in under 1 hour, call it 1 hour even, when there is a fat guy sitting near him drinking coffee, chatting him up and asking silly questions. if your shop is charging you for over 2 hours they are taking advantage of you, 3 hours and they are robbing you, 4 hours and theyre raping you, 16 hours is grounds for a beating and a call to the better business bureau.

6'1" 240lbs. 17.5lb ti bike and fat guy parts. my run of the mill 'planet x ti frame' is lighter and stiffer than my old steel RB-1. the 09' sram force group is lighter and a smidgen smoother than 07' ultegra. the ksyrium elite wheels are lighter than my old set of 3x dogs. i am faster on this 17.5lb bike, than my old 22lb steel ride, but i attribute it to the lighter one transmitting more of my effort to the road. while that may be true, i think the lighter one feels more lively and also, it flat out just feels faster. it is soooooo easy to ride, it makes me want to ride it faster. while it is faster, faster was never that big of a deal and how high it rates on the fun-o-meter, was always the salient point.

lighter doesnt always have to mean weaker, and sometimes the lighter high quality part, will be stronger than the heavier part made of garbage material. there is a point of diminishing returns no matter what you do, but we, as a group, dont have to be relegated to riding anchors.

sometimes weight isnt the goal, but a byproduct of better parts. i wasnt planning on having anything under 20lbs with fatguy parts, but it just ended up at 17.5lb.

the percentage of weight difference might be a bit deceiving, but i doubt there is anyone here who wouldnt notice a marked difference between a 25lb ride and an 18lb ride...which has, imo, a lot to do with nicer parts...and by nicer, i mean more efficient, esp the drivetrain.

oh yeah, dude charges by the minute, so he hit me for $45. it is 0430 and i havent been to bet yet, so im sure this has all been mentioned

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v177/grimace308/Bikes/IMG_4117.jpg

So, shall we compare apples to apples here, a 16lb commercially available name brand bike, fully assembled and road ready from a bricks and mortar shop.

The main problem we have with these comparisons is that the exact same thing in the States is about 30-50% cheaper than in Canada.
I got an XTR M960 crankset in the states for 279US. The only place I can find in Canada had it "On sale $80 off" for (get ready) $779. Even with a .80 cent exchange rate that is way more expensive.
I can get a basic camel back at Jenson for $19US on sale, the same thing at my LBS is $85CDN, and I've never seen it on sale.

So comparing US prices vs Canadian prices doesn't work! Oh Yeah and we pay 13% taxes on it as opposed to 5-7% in the US.

I was comparing apples to apples. You just chose to ignore it. Here's what I said:



The 16-17lb bicycle is a ready-to-ride Specialized Roubaix Expert sold by a local dealer in my area. Their "everyday price" on this bike is $3000. The 19-20lb aluminum bike is a ready-to-ride Fuji Roubaix Pro, sold by the local Performance Bike store for $1500.

So why the heck were you talking about a build packages which were a special deal at $3500? You know a Carbon frame does not automatically mean a 16lb bike, and the Roubaix Expert may be a fine bike, it uses Ultegra components, but I have never tried one, and Specialized (conveniently) does not provide weights for their bicycles, I checked both the Specialized catalogue I have here and the website, 16lbs, I don't think so. 19 maybe 20, yes, for 16 (7257g) your into the top end of the weight optimized category, meaning components are mostly chosen based on weight rather then reliability, strength or functionality. Around that level your into Dura-Ace components. i did some research on this, and found the world record holder is 4,166.9g (9.19lbs) most of the parts are custom built however, I doubt the bike has ever been ridden on the road. The weight BTW is including the weight of the air in the tires.

Bikes under 7500g use either Campy or Dura-Ace components exclusively, so your probably a little or a lot over with the Specialized.

The whole conversation is now moot anyway, since such bikes are not Clyde friendly anyway.....

The whole conversation is now moot anyway, since such bikes are not Clyde friendly anyway.....

They certainly can be Clyde friendly. I'd put anyone under 350 pounds on the 17pound CF bike I just built. And it's got a crappy and heavy 15 yo groupset. If I put on Campy Chorus 11, it'll drop another pound and a half. Changing out the heavy seatpost and saddle as well will take it down to 15. Then if I change out the heavy 36 spoke open pro/chorus hub wheels for something light, I could probably get it down to 14 or less. Until those wheels get changed out, the bike will easily hold up for most Clyde riding.

Granted those changes could end up in the $2500 price range, the group upgrade alone I've priced out at $1200. Saddle and seatpost another $300. Wheels anywhere from $500 to $1000 or more, pending what I end up with. These are long term changes. The bike rides really nicely as it is now.

For the reecord, I bought my 19 lb bike in 98 for $1039, Ultegra equipped aluminum at a local chain LBS. My bud bought his 22lb steel bike for $3000 Ultegra equipped at a local chain LBS.

If I'm doing he math correctly, my 19 lb bike was cheaper than his 22lb bike, not 3x the price.:D

Plus his steel frame (columbus tubing) snapped under his 210 lb body. MY aluminum "willl explode under load" is still going strong under my 240 lb body!:thumb:

"With pre built wheels, a reasonable mechanic should be able to assemble a bike in under 1 hour, call it 1 hour even, when there is a fat guy sitting near him drinking coffee, chatting him up and asking silly questions. if your shop is charging you for over 2 hours they are taking advantage of you, 3 hours and they are robbing you, 4 hours and theyre raping you, 16 hours is grounds for a beating and a call to the better business bureau."

Define "assemble".

So why the heck were you talking about a build packages which were a special deal at $3500?

Sorry to confuse: I was merely providing an example of how cheap a very light-weight bike could be. Your assertion was that anything at 16lbs or less should cost around CAD$10,000 which I think is around US$8000. I was merely providing an example of how wrong you were. Make sense now?


You know a Carbon frame does not automatically mean a 16lb bike, and the Roubaix Expert may be a fine bike, it uses Ultegra components, but I have never tried one, and Specialized (conveniently) does not provide weights for their bicycles, I checked both the Specialized catalogue I have here and the website, 16lbs, I don't think so.

I appreciate you spending all of your time trying to catch me in a mistake, rather than simply admitting that you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to bike weights and prices. In any event, I think you'll find that the statements I wrote are factually accurate. Just so we're clear, here's what I said:


The 16-17lb bicycle is a ready-to-ride Specialized Roubaix Expert sold by a local dealer in my area. Their "everyday price" on this bike is $3000. The 19-20lb aluminum bike is a ready-to-ride Fuji Roubaix Pro, sold by the local Performance Bike store for $1500.

Both bikes were purchased and weighed by friends of mine within the last 6 months. The Roubaix Expert weighed in at 16.9 lbs and the Fuji Roubaix Pro was 19.8lbs. I think that both frames were 54cm models, but the Fuji might have been a 56cm. In any event, they do have the 3lb difference in weight that you were harping about and both bikes are significantly cheaper than your prediction. In addition, there is only a 2X increase in price, rather than the 3X you predicted.


19 maybe 20, yes, for 16 (7257g) your into the top end of the weight optimized category, meaning components are mostly chosen based on weight rather then reliability, strength or functionality. Around that level your into Dura-Ace components. i did some research on this, and found the world record holder is 4,166.9g (9.19lbs) most of the parts are custom built however, I doubt the bike has ever been ridden on the road. The weight BTW is including the weight of the air in the tires.

Bikes under 7500g use either Campy or Dura-Ace components exclusively, so your probably a little or a lot over with the Specialized.

Again, you're showing your ignorance. I said the Specialized was in the 16-17lb weight range, and at 16.9lbs it is. The UCI minimum weight for bicycles is around 15lbs, so there are many manufacturers who target this weight. The lightest production bikes made, and admittedly they're a bit past the sweet spot in terms of price, are in the 14.5lb range with little sacrifice made to durability. If you are willing to sacrifice either durability or a lot of money, you can easily build a bike that weighs less than 13lbs/6000g! Don't worry, I won't try to confuse you with the details...

Contrary to your assertion, there are a number of gruppos that can be used to build sub-7500g bikes. SRAM Red is a favorite, since it's lighter than Dura-Ace and I believe it's also lighter than Campy, though I'd have to check the weights of the new Record 11 and Super Record 11 gruppos to be sure. In any event, with a sub-1000g frame and a set of light wheels you can come up with Ultegra SL builds that are less than 7500g!


The whole conversation is now moot anyway, since such bikes are not Clyde friendly anyway.....

Given that you are, apparently, not familiar with the prices, weights, or components in question how can you justify making the statement that such bikes aren't Clyde-friendly?

They certainly can be Clyde friendly. I'd put anyone under 350 pounds on the 17pound CF bike I just built. And it's got a crappy and heavy 15 yo groupset. If I put on Campy Chorus 11, it'll drop another pound and a half. Changing out the heavy seatpost and saddle as well will take it down to 15. Then if I change out the heavy 36 spoke open pro/chorus hub wheels for something light, I could probably get it down to 14 or less. Until those wheels get changed out, the bike will easily hold up for most Clyde riding.

Granted those changes could end up in the $2500 price range, the group upgrade alone I've priced out at $1200. Saddle and seatpost another $300. Wheels anywhere from $500 to $1000 or more, pending what I end up with. These are long term changes. The bike rides really nicely as it is now.

Makes me wonder then, if 17lb bikes are so cheap and easy to make, why the heck the average road bike is 22 or 23 lbs. It's because they are not, and I wonder about your 17lb bike, have you actually weighed the bike as complete on a certified accurate scale, or are you simply lifting it and guessing 17lbs?

Sorry to confuse: I was merely providing an example of how cheap a very light-weight bike could be. Your assertion was that anything at 16lbs or less should cost around CAD$10,000 which I think is around US$8000. I was merely providing an example of how wrong you were. Make sense now?



I appreciate you spending all of your time trying to catch me in a mistake, rather than simply admitting that you don't know what you're talking about when it comes to bike weights and prices. In any event, I think you'll find that the statements I wrote are factually accurate. Just so we're clear, here's what I said:




Guess if I am SO stupid and such a moron, I should just leave the group to you experts? Huh?

This used to be a nice group, with nice people in it, it's turning into another "experts" group, I don't have time for this crap.

Good day.

Makes me wonder then, if 17lb bikes are so cheap and easy to make, why the heck the average road bike is 22 or 23 lbs. It's because they are not, and I wonder about your 17lb bike, have you actually weighed the bike as complete on a certified accurate scale, or are you simply lifting it and guessing 17lbs?Source? "Or are you simply... guessing..."? Besides, no one said lighter bikes are cheap and easy. They (we) said they are not as expensive as you said (three times the cost of a heavier bike).

Also, I do know that according to the Bicycle Dealer's Association, the vast majority of bikes sold in the U.S. are MTB's. And of course, their heavier weight will drive up any average. Although, you said road bikes, but your dissemination of facts is suspect, so I wonder if this fact is included in the average weight for bikes sold?

Then of course, I'd take a guess here and say that X-Mart sells more bikes than anyone else. These bikes are also--I'm assuming--much heavier than a quality bike you'd get at an LBS, again pushing any average weights higher. But then, this whole paragraph is an assumption on my part.


Guess if I am SO stupid and such a moron, I should just leave the group to you experts? Huh?

This used to be a nice group, with nice people in it, it's turning into another "experts" group, I don't have time for this crap.

Good day.Well, I'm certainly no expert.

But I do have a problem with the large amount of mis-information disseminated (especially) here on C & A, and I value Truth, so although I've been largely silent on this debate, I do think you erred in stating the "3x" argument of your original post. And elsewhere you state that CF bikes are not clyde-friendly. Well, I'm a 260-lb. clyde and I ride a full carbon bike. Have for 2-1/2 years and almost 20,000 miles. No problems at all, in spite of the abuse I've inflicted upon her. What's been unfriendly about that?

I'm sorry if you disagree with me, and I certainly don't mean to offend you or anyone, but I believe the others have logically shown that your over-generalization was false.

my fuji roubaix pro about 21-22 lbs but that is with pedals and cages and seatbag with tubes and CO2 using the magical difference on a floor scale method but from the dealer it was under 20.

yeah I noticed a difference! it made me slower.

went from a 35lb with 17mph average-to 24lbs 19mph average (but this went down to 17mhp)

then did it backwards

24lbs 17mhp average to 35lbs and only 14mhp average (this built up to 17mhp again. I guess that was my comfort zone back then)

Felt more explosive on the bike, and energetic in my everyday activities with the 35lbs bike. The bike I ride now weighs 32 lbs.