Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Less weight = shorter trip, how true is this?

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Less weight = shorter trip, how true is this?

Old 10-26-08, 02:28 AM
  #1  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Less weight = shorter trip, how true is this?

How true is this? I've been browsing some threads and it seems the universal opinion is a bike that is carrying more weight wouldn't slow you down unless you are climbing many hills.

I'm sort of in a crisis here. Time to me is a big deal, from getting to one place to another. At the same time, I also carry a lot of material, and I was planning on buying the two heaviest racks from Wald for extra space since I feel having more carrying capacity than not enough, is always better. However, as I said, time is also a big issue for me. I don't really need the cardio since I already do lots of cardio on my own. I decided to start commuting by bike for financial reasons, convenience(parking) but time is so precious to me since my life is basically on the run, with so many activities, and I don't really have the time to just "cruise" somewhere slowly.

I was planning on buying a road bike for myself in the future(when I have more money) to get me to the gym as quickly as possible at 5:30 in the morning. During this trip, I literally carry nothing, so that's why I was thinking about purchasing a road bike to ride instead of using my current hybrid.

However, it seems to me that looking at the time and speed threads, the consensus is that weight doesn't matter except if you're starting and stopping a lot(for acceleration) and trying to go up the hill. I would love for this to be true, because that way I wouldn't have to

1. Buy another lighter bike
2. Constantly worry about the trade off between weight and durability when purchasing items like racks and panniers, locks, etc.

If the speed thing were true, would that mean that in a generally flat riding surface, a person on a mountain bike would ride just as fast as a person on a road bike, though he would just have to work harder?

I mean, if buying this road bike for my empty morning trips can save me 10 minutes round trip everyday then I would buy it in a heart beat. HOWEVER...if the road bike just makes my trip EASIER...and not quicker, than if I did it with a hybrid with the racks and stuff, then I'd totally take the hybrid. Working harder is not an issue with me, I know I will eventually get those thigh muscles the more I ride, but it's just time.

This is probably the most important thing for me to know at this point because it dictates everything that I buy from here on out. Lol.

Last edited by aHappyCamper; 10-26-08 at 02:55 AM.
aHappyCamper is offline  
Old 10-26-08, 07:44 AM
  #2  
Uber Goober
 
StephenH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dallas area, Texas
Posts: 11,758
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 190 Post(s)
Liked 41 Times in 32 Posts
I understand mountain bike tires can have a good bit more rolling (and wind) resistance than road bike tires.

While the weight isn't that critical, as you say, hanging big old baskets off a bike is sure going to make a difference in aerodynamics. Keep in mind that these time trial guys get a pretty noticeable effect just from the helmet alone. Big baskets are for throwing papers at 8 mph, not for riding the Tour de France.

Personally, if I was riding a bike that much and that pressed for time, visiting a gym would seem pretty pointless. Maybe that's just me, though. I was once walking along the Galveston Seawall, enjoying a marvelous spring evening with cool breezes coming in off the gulf, and the sound of the surf. And I walked past a gym, and there's people walking on treadmills. I still don't understand that.
__________________
"be careful this rando stuff is addictive and dan's the 'pusher'."
StephenH is offline  
Old 10-26-08, 08:24 AM
  #3  
Bike ≠ Car ≠ Ped.
 
BarracksSi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 13,861

Bikes: Some bikes. Hell, they're all the same, ain't they?

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by aHappyCamper
I was planning on buying a road bike for myself in the future(when I have more money) to get me to the gym as quickly as possible at 5:30 in the morning.
I hope the reason you're going to the gym is to do upper-body weightlifting. Otherwise there just isn't much reason to go if you'll be biking a lot.

IMO, unless you're riding in the park with the family, don't bother with a hybrid. Go ahead and get a road bike, and also look at touring and cyclocross bikes. They'll be built tougher and, in the case of tourers, be designed with carrying substantial loads in mind. And if you're reasonably fit, they'll both still let you drop the OCP'ers with their carbon race frames.
BarracksSi is offline  
Old 10-26-08, 09:59 AM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
brianmcg123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: TN
Posts: 1,286

Bikes: 2013 Trek Madone; 2008 Surly Long Haul Trucker

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 361 Post(s)
Liked 59 Times in 35 Posts
If you are riding the the gym on a road bike versus a touring bike with really wide tires you may save yourself something like 30 seconds every 25 miles.
brianmcg123 is offline  
Old 10-26-08, 10:35 AM
  #5  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by StephenH
I understand mountain bike tires can have a good bit more rolling (and wind) resistance than road bike tires.

While the weight isn't that critical, as you say, hanging big old baskets off a bike is sure going to make a difference in aerodynamics. Keep in mind that these time trial guys get a pretty noticeable effect just from the helmet alone. Big baskets are for throwing papers at 8 mph, not for riding the Tour de France.

Personally, if I was riding a bike that much and that pressed for time, visiting a gym would seem pretty pointless. Maybe that's just me, though. I was once walking along the Galveston Seawall, enjoying a marvelous spring evening with cool breezes coming in off the gulf, and the sound of the surf. And I walked past a gym, and there's people walking on treadmills. I still don't understand that.
The baskets I plan to get, the Wald 582 actually folds up when not in use, so I was planning on folding them when I'm obviously not caring anything though the baskets themselves still pack on 5.5lb total. Then add the front big basket I'm getting...the 157, probably another 5lb there, and then racks, heavy lighting, and etc.

Last edited by aHappyCamper; 10-26-08 at 10:39 AM.
aHappyCamper is offline  
Old 10-26-08, 10:59 AM
  #6  
Senior Member
 
deraltekluge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,195

Bikes: Kona Cinder Cone, Sun EZ-3 AX

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
HOWEVER...if the road bike just makes my trip EASIER...and not quicker...
Easier and quicker are really the same thing. If you can go a certain speed with a certain amount of effort, and you do something to reduce the effort, you can go back to the original effort level and go faster.

Mountain bikes are slower than road bikes mainly because of greater drag...lower pressure knobby tires and a more upright riding position both require greater effort for a given speed.

Weight of the bike has little effect on speed on a level road...but where do you find that level road? Every real road has some slope somewhere, so a heavier mountain bike loses to a lighter road bike in that respect, too. And you lose more uphill than you gain back downhill...

If time is really the big deal to you that you say, you'd better get an automobile.
deraltekluge is offline  
Old 10-26-08, 04:28 PM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
Retro Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225

Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 642 Times in 363 Posts
Originally Posted by aHappyCamper
I mean, if buying this road bike for my empty morning trips can save me 10 minutes round trip everyday then I would buy it in a heart beat.
A question that only you can answer.

I'm a life long experiment of one. I say try whatever you think might work for the way that you ride and see for yourself. You have the rest of your life to find the answers.
Retro Grouch is offline  
Old 10-26-08, 05:40 PM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 11,829
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1234 Post(s)
Liked 741 Times in 552 Posts
Everywhere I have toured there were mountains or at least hills. I think that too much weight is the #1 thing that will make me miserable on tour. I really notice the difference if I can send 2-4 pounds of stuff home. If you are riding with others where the pace is set and brisk this is more true than if riding alone and can just go slower.
staehpj1 is offline  
Old 10-26-08, 09:52 PM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,215
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by aHappyCamper
The baskets I plan to get, the Wald 582 actually folds up when not in use, so I was planning on folding them when I'm obviously not caring anything though the baskets themselves still pack on 5.5lb total. Then add the front big basket I'm getting...the 157, probably another 5lb there, and then racks, heavy lighting, and etc.
The difference between a new road bike and a new touring bike is less than 5 pounds. And also consider that you probably weigh at least 120 lbs (or more, I am guessing here) so plus or minus a few pounds isn't going to drastically alter your total weight.

Theoretically speaking with high pressure tires, weight only affects your acceleration and your hill climbing ability, and in both cases, that is energy that you will get back going down hill, or when you use your greater momentum to keep your speed up.

In reality, weight will slightly increase your rolling resistance as well, especially if you have under pressure tires as most people tend to have. You also don't quite get all your hill climbing energy back because you climb at a slow speed, with low wind resistance, but you descend at a high speed, with high wind resistance, and the wind resistance is proportional to the square of your speed, so you are losing more energy than you would if you did the whole climb and descent at an intermediate speed. More weight also means that you will be dumping a lot more energy every time you hit the brakes at a stop sign.

So long story short, on flat ground with hard tires, the difference is negligible.

Last edited by Dan The Man; 10-26-08 at 09:58 PM.
Dan The Man is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 01:23 AM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,771
Mentioned: 125 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1454 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by Retro Grouch
A question that only you can answer.

I'm a life long experiment of one. I say try whatever you think might work for the way that you ride and see for yourself. You have the rest of your life to find the answers.
This man has just given the answer to every single question ever likely to be posted on BikeForums. In fact, probably for life.

I've been trying to find a way of saying it. Now I don't have to. Well done Retro.
Rowan is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 01:49 AM
  #11  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Aus
Posts: 636
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rowan
This man has just given the answer to every single question ever likely to be posted on BikeForums. In fact, probably for life.

I've been trying to find a way of saying it. Now I don't have to. Well done Retro.
Yeah OK. But personally I'd rather learn from another persons mistakes rather than my own. Especially when it comes down to an investment like a bike when lots of money can be wasted on an incorrect choice. There is no point in reinventing the wheel.

To OP. Basically a road-style bike will make your commute both faster and easier, depending on how you ride. This is due to overall weight (although this is really minor unless you are counting seconds), geometry, components (lack of suspension etc), skinny tires and gearing. Road bikes have a higher maximum speed compared to say, mountain bikes because of the gearing unless they are purposely configured differently.

Choose some bikes and take test rides on them if you are really concerned.
damnable is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 04:04 AM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,771
Mentioned: 125 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1454 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by damnable
Yeah OK. But personally I'd rather learn from another persons mistakes rather than my own. Especially when it comes down to an investment like a bike when lots of money can be wasted on an incorrect choice. There is no point in reinventing the wheel.
And tell me... how do you sort through all the other people's mistakes? For every question like the OP's, there are at least two polarised answers.

The silliest part is that you finish your post with: "Choose some bikes and take test rides on them if you are really concerned."

Sort of supports my argument, doesn't it?
Rowan is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 05:57 AM
  #13  
Galveston County Texas
 
10 Wheels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: In The Wind
Posts: 33,218

Bikes: 02 GTO, 2011 Magnum

Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1346 Post(s)
Liked 1,234 Times in 615 Posts
Commuting is 10 % Bike , 90 % Motor.
You are The Motor.
__________________
Fred "The Real Fred"

10 Wheels is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 10:02 AM
  #14  
Senior Member
 
Retro Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,225

Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1572 Post(s)
Liked 642 Times in 363 Posts
Originally Posted by damnable
Yeah OK. But personally I'd rather learn from another persons mistakes rather than my own. Especially when it comes down to an investment like a bike when lots of money can be wasted on an incorrect choice. There is no point in reinventing the wheel.
The OP's question had to do with trade offs regarding light weight, durability and utility. Nobody can answer that question for you because everybody draws the trade off lines differently.
Retro Grouch is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 12:30 PM
  #15  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: England
Posts: 12,948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 7 Posts
I think a lighter bike is always better, even for an everyday utiltiy ride. A lot of US style utility bikes (eg Worksman) seem to carry too much metal. 5lbs a rack seems a lot; you can get racks that are strong without being excessively heavy. Check out the Cetma racks, they can carry huge front loads.
MichaelW is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 03:15 PM
  #16  
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
Posts: 19,913

Bikes: Dale MT2000. Bianchi FS920 Kona Explosif. Giant TCR C. Boreas Ignis. Pinarello Fp Uno.

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
I do not commute or tour or carry any excess weight on my bikes. Couple of years ago and I changed from Mountain to road bikes. Just a couple of rides and a 100 miler that used to take just over 7 hours on the MTB with slicks- took just under 7 hours on the road bike. OK- A starter road bike that was not excessively heavy and fitted with standard components. (A Giant OCR 3). Thought I had wasted my money but sorted the bike to fit better- Got myself fitter and changed the wheels and tyres. That same 100 miler now took just under 6 hours. The bike weighed 19 1/2 lbs with the new wheels and the few mods I had made.

A Year later and I got a better bike. Full race frame and in ride trim it weighs 15 1/2lbs. This bike flies and is so easy to pedal so did the 100 miler again. Just under 6 hours in similar weather conditions------BUT this time I could have gone further. That lighter bike may not have made me faster- but on the type of riding I do- I do not get as tired and distance for normal rides is getting longer.
__________________
How long was I in the army? Five foot seven.


Spike Milligan
stapfam is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 04:07 PM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Northern Nevada
Posts: 3,811
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Not to be unkind, but my impression here is that you're WAY overthinking this, and possibly way too impressed with how busy and committed you are. Buy a bike and ride it when you feel like it. It's recreation, not a duty.
Velo Dog is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 04:31 PM
  #18  
cab horn
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,353

Bikes: 1987 Bianchi Campione

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 42 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 25 Times in 18 Posts
Originally Posted by aHappyCamper
How true is this? I've been browsing some threads and it seems the universal opinion is a bike that is carrying more weight wouldn't slow you down unless you are climbing many hills.

I'm sort of in a crisis here. Time to me is a big deal, from getting to one place to another. At the same time, I also carry a lot of material, and I was planning on buying the two heaviest racks from Wald for extra space since I feel having more carrying capacity than not enough, is always better. However, as I said, time is also a big issue for me. I don't really need the cardio since I already do lots of cardio on my own. I decided to start commuting by bike for financial reasons, convenience(parking) but time is so precious to me since my life is basically on the run, with so many activities, and I don't really have the time to just "cruise" somewhere slowly.

I was planning on buying a road bike for myself in the future(when I have more money) to get me to the gym as quickly as possible at 5:30 in the morning. During this trip, I literally carry nothing, so that's why I was thinking about purchasing a road bike to ride instead of using my current hybrid.

However, it seems to me that looking at the time and speed threads, the consensus is that weight doesn't matter except if you're starting and stopping a lot(for acceleration) and trying to go up the hill. I would love for this to be true, because that way I wouldn't have to

1. Buy another lighter bike
2. Constantly worry about the trade off between weight and durability when purchasing items like racks and panniers, locks, etc.

If the speed thing were true, would that mean that in a generally flat riding surface, a person on a mountain bike would ride just as fast as a person on a road bike, though he would just have to work harder?

I mean, if buying this road bike for my empty morning trips can save me 10 minutes round trip everyday then I would buy it in a heart beat. HOWEVER...if the road bike just makes my trip EASIER...and not quicker, than if I did it with a hybrid with the racks and stuff, then I'd totally take the hybrid. Working harder is not an issue with me, I know I will eventually get those thigh muscles the more I ride, but it's just time.

This is probably the most important thing for me to know at this point because it dictates everything that I buy from here on out. Lol.
1) Stop overthinking this
2) A lighter bike will appear to be much more agile and fast because it's much easier to accelerate. This will apply everywhere until you start riding in the speed regime where aerodynamics is more of a factor than weight. Which includes most road rides that don't stop for lights much.
operator is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 06:23 PM
  #19  
ǝıd ǝʌol ʎllɐǝɹ I
 
JeanCoutu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 518
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
In urban riding, what I find happens after a while is top speed seems unchanged but acceleration becomes slower and slower, like the acceleration fuel tank gets empty and can't refill fast enough between stops. A lighter bike makes a difference in how long before this happens.

Otherwise my fastest bike for going A to B around town is not the lightest, it's a 15Kg singlespeed road bike. I think the reason it's fastest is mostly it's aggressive fit that makes it feel great only when being ridden hard, so it gets ridden that way.
JeanCoutu is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 08:40 PM
  #20  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Velo Dog
Not to be unkind, but my impression here is that you're WAY overthinking this, and possibly way too impressed with how busy and committed you are. Buy a bike and ride it when you feel like it. It's recreation, not a duty.
Overthinking things and having everything done in a meticulous manner is part of my personality traits. Nothing I can do.

And I don't think I'm "way too impressed" with how busy and committed I am. I don't just go to work and come home at the end of the day. I like other average people sometimes have other things like school and extracurricular activities that end and start at a certain time. When things like work, activities, and school are quite a distance apart from each other, things like time it takes to get to a certain place come into play.

Why you think I'm trying to rub my ego here is beyond me.
I'm simply trying to make the best use of my time by finding out if a 12lb difference sounds as bad as it is.

And no, biking is not a recreation for everyone. To some it is a duty(with a little fun), and the only way to get from place A to B.
aHappyCamper is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 08:58 PM
  #21  
Bike ≠ Car ≠ Ped.
 
BarracksSi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 13,861

Bikes: Some bikes. Hell, they're all the same, ain't they?

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by aHappyCamper
I'm simply trying to make the best use of my time by finding out if a 12lb difference sounds as bad as it is.
Nah, the weight doesn't make nearly as much difference as riding position, gearing, and tires. A road bike that's 12 lbs heavier than a mountain bike (it'd have to be a super-light mountain bike, though) will be easier to ride faster.
BarracksSi is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 10:06 PM
  #22  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 34
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BarracksSi
I hope the reason you're going to the gym is to do upper-body weightlifting. Otherwise there just isn't much reason to go if you'll be biking a lot.

IMO, unless you're riding in the park with the family, don't bother with a hybrid. Go ahead and get a road bike, and also look at touring and cyclocross bikes. They'll be built tougher and, in the case of tourers, be designed with carrying substantial loads in mind. And if you're reasonably fit, they'll both still let you drop the OCP'ers with their carbon race frames.
Definitely upper body weight lifting.

It kills me on the inside to see people at the gym cycling on a standstill cycle.

You know, I was actually contemplating getting a road bike before I got the hybrid I have right now but the man had told me that I'd be better off with a hybrid. I told him speed was my biggest concern but I had a lot of things to lug around as well so he suggested that I get the hybrid(I have the Trek 7.2Fx). He said that road bikes aren't made for carrying around luggage. I still don't know which one I should have gotten but I wish I could've been more patient.
aHappyCamper is offline  
Old 10-27-08, 10:26 PM
  #23  
Bike ≠ Car ≠ Ped.
 
BarracksSi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 13,861

Bikes: Some bikes. Hell, they're all the same, ain't they?

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Don't sweat it. You're on your way to following the n+1 rule like the rest of us.

To most people, this and this look like "road bikes", but the only real similarity to a typical race-y road bike is the handlebars and the riding position they afford.
BarracksSi is offline  
Old 10-28-08, 06:43 AM
  #24  
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 11,829
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1234 Post(s)
Liked 741 Times in 552 Posts
Originally Posted by aHappyCamper
It kills me on the inside to see people at the gym cycling on a standstill cycle.
Nothing wrong with stationary workouts. They work great for some. Spinning classes in particular allow some riders to push themselves harder than they would out riding alone without an instructor yelling at them. I am an outdoor only rider except for a little roller riding when snowed in or something, but I wouldn't knock spin classes; I know some folks who have gotten impressive results with them.
staehpj1 is offline  
Old 10-28-08, 12:46 PM
  #25  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 6,432
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 539 Post(s)
Liked 44 Times in 38 Posts
I always find this subject somewhat puzzling. I mean, "only" accelerating and hills are supposedly affected by weight. Do you have a commute route that doesn't involve any sort of hills or stoplights? If you do, I'd love to hear about it! :-) Hills are somewhat common, as are stoplights which have to do with, you know, acceleration.

The only thing that makes you *much**much* slower on a mountain bike than a road bike is if you're using knobby tires rather than slicks.

Equal to that is probably how well the bike fits you. If you're going buy a new bike, getting a bike that's the right size and fit well for you is often more important than which particular bike you buy.

Unrelated to which bike you buy, do you use bike shoes? Bike shoes that clip into the pedals tend to make you go faster, but that tradeoff is that now you're stuck wearing bike shoes. You can walk around in mountain bike shoes, but you might not want to run on a treadmill in them or anything. The alternative is those "toe cage" things on pedals where you just slip your regular shoes into them, but the problem with those is it's hard to get your foot out in an emergency. Bike shoes are actually rather easy to get out of - you twist the back of your foot sideways and they unclip, which is the motion you tend to make anyways. The toe cage things require you to pull your foot out of them to the rear, which is kind of unnatural and takes a little longer.

Onto the list of things affecting your speed, but somewhat less, I would add that wider tires are slower (I'm not talking about 28c vs 23c, I'm talking about 1.5 inches vs 28c). Someone always seems to pop up to disagree with me, but I've tried 2 tires sizes back to back and that's what I think.

Also, if you're planning on commuting with your bike that you'll be leaving locked up outside you probably don't want to buy anything to expensive for fear of it getting stolen. I keep hearing this saying about commuter bikes - no matter what bike you buy, they all weight the same. If you ride a crappy 40lb bike that costs $100 with a cable lock, it weighs the same as a 20lb bike with 20lbs of locks. :-)

I'm afraid no one really has the information to tell you if a road bike will be faster. We don't know what kind of hybrid bike you have now, what kind of tires it has, if it's your size and if it fits, how long your route is, what kind of terrain your route goes over (hilly? stoplights? windy?)...

The only way to even come close is to time your ride, than go back and test ride a road bike (that's your size and fitted for you) on the same route and time that. Of course, that takes time, AND still isn't going to give you conclusive results. When I switched from a basic heavier touring bike to a much higher end road bike that also fit me much, much better I was initially dissapointed to find that it made my trip easier, but more like 2mph faster. Not a big difference, certainly not for the price difference. On my older touring bike, in peak shape I'd typically be biking along at 16-17mph). That was as fast as I could go, and I was working hard to go that fast though I could keep it up for hours. On my new road bike I was going 16mph without trying hard, 18mph-19mph if I was really pushing it. But then after a month of doing of a lot of riding, my speed has gone up to 19-21mph for most of my ride (on the flat, no wind which is oddly enough half of my riding). Different muscles I guess.
PaulRivers is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.