gundogblue

While Im no longer a rookie biker anymore, Im going into my second season riding a road bike, I guess I would still be considered a fairly new rider. I've read on this forum about the advantages of lighter bikes, and I do beleave that, but it seems to me that the rider's weight, plus the bikes weight would be the complete package, so whats the difference if a 190lb rider got a new bike that was 5 lbs less than his old bike, or if the rider just looses 5 lbs? Would'nt the complete weight package be the same? Im serious about this, unless Im missing something. I know that all bikes are not the same, some bikes are far more responsive than others, and also that some riders are in great shape, and it would be a detriment if they lost any weight, but Im talking about the average rider. I've thought about this alot, and as I've said I've read alot here from people who know much more than I about this sport, and talk about the importance of a light bike, so I would really like the answer to this question.
Thanks,
Paul

hao

You are thinking.

Homebrew01

Yes, the total weight of rider + bike is what matters.

big john

What if the rider lost 5 pounds and got a bike that is 5 pounds lighter?

mmmdonuts

+1. Think less, ride more.

ericm979

There's no difference between losing 5 lbs on your body vs your bike,l except that losing 5 lbs of body weight will make you feel better in everything you do while a 5 lb lighter bike will only feel better when you're riding up hill. And the "rotatating weight" effect is so small that it is meaningless.

When you're as lean as you can get then worry about getting a lighter bike.

+1 for riding more.

cmolway

Everyone wants the newest, lightest bike. But when you are just getting into cycling, body mass matters more (as long as your bike fits). When I first got into road biking I lost 35lbs in the first season. By the time spring of the second season came, I couldn't believe how much better I climbed and faster I rode. After that season I shed more weight and gained more speed. I went from hanging onto the back of the B-group, to leading the A-group hammerfests in a few seasons. Pretty sure if I bought a uber-light bike and kept the pounds on I'd still be hanging off the back of the B-group.

Nowadays, the Wife is starting to tell me to stop losing weight. Sounds like a good way to convince her to let me buy that carbon wheel-set I have been lusting for.

The ones who need the lightest bikes are the conditioned riders with no body weight to shed. That and the ones with ample disposable income.

StanSeven

Except a new 5 lb lighter bike will make you proud and happy. You end up riding more and harder and end up improving much more than by losing weight (which is difficut to do without exercise).

Grumpy McTrumpy

some of us don't have 5 lbs to lose.

spock

Also a 28 year old heavier bike will make you proud and happy. I would know.

Homebrew01

And some of us do

ahsposo 

Oh, pu-leaze...

BlueWilier

A 28 year old that lighter would make most of us happy!

x514

haters gonna hate

K&K_Dad

OP, if you want in on the discussion there was a thread waaaaaaaaay back that discussed this exact same thing. Lots of (non)useful posts in that thread.

good times, good times. man those were the days. names in that thread no longer here...

yep, good times.

Grumpy McTrumpy

don't you mean fatties gonna eat?

Homebrew01

I resemble that remark

roadiejorge 

Yes.

With more time spent riding your fitness will improve, and while a lighter bike will make climbing a bit easier if you're talking about the "average" rider then a lighter bike isn't going to make that big of a difference.

gregf83 

At 190lbs you'll be faster if you lose 5lbs off your body than your bike.

mollusk

I went to the noping calculator (https://www.noping.net/english/) and ran the following cases:

Fixed parameters:

Hands on tops
Height = 70.5"
68 F
25 ft above sea level
no wind
no slope to the road
90 rpm cadence
20 mph speed

Next I ran several cases where the sum of the rider and bicycle weight was held constant at 220 lbs:

160 lb rider + 60 lb bike => 255 watts
180 lb rider + 40 lb bike => 265 watts
200 lb rider + 20 lb bike => 274 watts
220 lb rider + 0 lb bike => 282 watts

Something in their model says that it is much better to lose weight off the rider than off the bike.

Grumpy McTrumpy

probably just an estimate of rider drag area

tagaproject6

You need to get your bike as light as possible. Throwing money at the bike works wonders for its lightness. There is nothing more impressive to the unwashed masses and those not initiated in the cycling world than alight bike. Notice that the first thing they do to your bike when you show it to them...they ALWAYS pick it up and remark at the lightness of the bike.

The lightness of your bike is directly proportional to the way they percieve your awesomeness as a cyclist!

Go out there and peruse the weight weenie world.

FLvector

I'm starving and this is making me hungry. Time for a big lunch.

brianappleby

Light bikes might actually matter if you're racing. A couple hundred grams up a long hill might be worth a few seconds, which might be the difference between keeping with the lead group and getting dropped. This weight is exactly the same if one can lose it off of their body, but some racers are at the point where losing weight isn't possible without compromising other performance qualities.

A couple of seconds over a 20 minute climb isn't even going to be noticeable if you're just riding and having fun. People who think that their bike "feels" lighter after some purchase are just trying to justify that purchase.

himespau 

not that there's anything wrong with that


ps, my bike weighs a good 40 lbs.