Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Senior Member trmcgeehan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Somerset, KY -- near Lake Cumberland
    My Bikes
    1980 Univega; 1985 Ross; 1994 Trek 1400 -- all road bikes
    Posts
    757
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Is a 38 pound bike better than a 22?

    I have a 1985 Ross road bike that's a real tank -- 38 pounds ready to roll. I also have a 1994 aluminum Trek 1400 that weighs in at 22 pounds. My theory is, the heavier bike gives a better workout, especially in my area where the hills are more plentiful than the flats. The heavier bike is also faster on the downhills. I can attain 44 mph on the Ross; 40 with the Trek. Has any other senior cyclist found this to be true?
    "I am a true laborer. I earn that I eat, get that I wear, owe no man hate, envy no man's happiness, glad of other men's good, content with my harm." As You Like It, Act 3, Scene 2. Shakespeare.
    "Deep down, I'm pretty superficial." Ava Gardner.

  2. #2
    Riding a bitsa
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Posts
    519
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm not a bicycle expert, but have participated in athletics of various nature for a long time. Training is specific. If your aim is to train to push a heavy bike around, then the Ross is best. However either bike can handle you putting the same wattage into your workouts. Thus, from a pure fitness view, it should make no difference - other than for the same effort, all things being equal, you'll be moving faster on the lighter bike.

  3. #3
    Humvee of bikes =Worksman Nightshade's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    5,264
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by trmcgeehan
    I have a 1985 Ross road bike that's a real tank -- 38 pounds ready to roll. I also have a 1994 aluminum Trek 1400 that weighs in at 22 pounds. My theory is, the heavier bike gives a better workout, especially in my area where the hills are more plentiful than the flats. The heavier bike is also faster on the downhills. I can attain 44 mph on the Ross; 40 with the Trek. Has any other senior cyclist found this to be true?
    You're comparing apples to oranges mate. One is a cheap everyman's machine, the other is a newer
    everyman's machine. Both will give a good workout.

  4. #4
    Time for a change. stapfam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    6 miles inland from the coast of Sussex, in the South East of England
    My Bikes
    Dale MT2000. Bianchi FS920 Kona Explosif. Giant TCR C. Boreas Ignis. Pinarello Fp Uno.
    Posts
    19,915
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Both will give a good workout but the lighter bike will be more enjoyable.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Dchiefransom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Newark, CA. San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    6,191
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It depends on what you're trying to do. If you put the same horsepower engine in two different weight vehicles, the lighter one will move faster.

  6. #6
    Senior Member late's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Southern Maine
    Posts
    8,251
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's all about the fun. Which one do you like better?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •