Originally Posted by
Urbanis
To me, the issue around bicycle weight is not about "performance" per se but actual portability. There are circumstances in which I regularly need to carry my bike up and down flights of stairs--to get it onto a subway/train platform, or to access the bike path near me, or get it up the steps fronting my apartment building. I also have to lift my bike when I put it in a car trunk. So in these circumstances, yes, a lighter-weight bike can make a lot of difference.
Exactly! If there's ever a need to make a bike as lightweight as possible, shouldn't it be for a folding bike? Puppypilgrim is right though; it doesn't make too much sense to throw big money in order to shave a gram here or two, but when you're lugging the bike onto and off of a train/bus/subway everyday, the ounces add up! And what about cyclocross, wherein one spends quite a significant portion of a race running while carrying a bike. Let's also not forget the times when it's necessary to lift the bike up in moves such as bunnyhopping--which I plan to do a lot of (hence the requirement for ruggedness).
I don't think I'm asking too much for a 19-20lb folder with SS configuration. I think most non-folding bikes can easily do this without expensive componentry. I simply want a folder that doesn't sacrifice weight for the ability to fold.