Originally Posted by
CharneK
Well sure. But look at his supposed frame weight, less than your chosen crankset. And honestly I just can't see that bike being all that fun to ride. There is a reason why even the highest end road bikes weigh 14-16 pounds. Any lighter and one of two things happens; you're price skyrockets, or you loose significantly in the stiffness of the frame. I'd also bet the frame is like a 52 if not a 50.
Assuming you're building for the roads, I would focus not on weight but on durability and quality. Aim for something like 16 or 17 pounds, much more doable.
Also, olympic and world championship riders are not riding bikes that light. Must be a reason.
its not my thread, i was just prodding a little bit. you have to admit, the bike in the link is quite impressive. apparently its ridden quite a bit.
i built my bike to be strong and stiff with disregard to weight and it ended up about 17lbs (58cm semi-compact) i cant complain at all. it feels much lighter and stiffer than my 21lb steel geared bike.
Originally Posted by
TejanoTrackie
Yes, this rule also applies to track bikes, which is pretty silly since track bikes are inherently lighter than road bikes. Mercifully, this only applies at national and world championship events, so you don't have to worry about this at local events. Nonetheless, very few competitive track bikes weigh under 6.8kg, as most riders opt for stiffness and strength over light weight.
ive not raced on a track (i want to badly) but i cant imagine there is a huge benefit to an ultra light bike (within reason) like you said, i would think the real benefit is in power transfer and aerodynamics.