Weight and aerodynamics will always be a hotly debated topic. I have my opinions, as does everyone. Mine differ somewhat from my "buddies" but neither have any real scientific data to back our claims. The two buddies that I've debated this with a lot are racers (one real- one wannabe).

The real racer comes waltzing in one day sporting a new CF ride. Ceramic bearings- aero spokes (16), which weighed in a bit over 14 lbs. As he was telling me all the benefits of the components I listened, but not without a lot of eye eye-rollin'. You got to understand that he doesn't know much about bikes, but believes everything he's told by salespeople and his racer buddies. So, he's telling about the benefits of aero this, and aero that. How much it helped top speed, blah-blah-blah. I asked, "what do you do about them legs flailing around- do the aero spokes and wheels offset this?" Hummm. So he says it must be the ceramic bearing hubs then.

So I challenged him to a couple of (very non-scientific) tests. First a static spin test. Both front and rear wheels brought up to speed (his and mine) and allowed to spin down. Wouldn't you know it, my lowly Ultegra hubs (32) round spokes- 425 gram rims, and 100 gram heavier tire, spun about 30% longer on the front, and almost twice as long on the rear. I knew a part of it was the heavier tire and rim, but the most of it is because my lowly hub spun better. So I said...

"Static tests don't really benefit from aero stuff so let's do a coasting test." Just a couple blocks from me there is a five block long downgrade- not steep, maybe 3-4%. Starting from a dead stop I beat him to the bottom by nearly a block length and bested his top speed by almost 5 mph (could be some computer errors in there). I had on Levi's and he had on his wifes yoga gear- AKA bike clothes. He was so smug and sure at the outset that the only comment I could conjur up was, "you spent six grand on THAT?" Didn't hear from him for almost a month. LOL

Other buddy subjected himself to the same test. His equipment wasn't as good as the first guy's, but better than mine- he thought. His results were even worse.

Either should have waxed me in the coast test at least. Combined bike and rider weight for each of them was 10 lbs heavier than me and they had "aero gear." The static spin down test I kew I could win hands down. I had a heavier rim and tire combo and there ain't nothing that spins like a loose ball Shimano hub, and the Shimano free hub has less loss to friction and the action of the pawls.

However, I will take lighter weight every time I can within reason. I won't take lighter weight at a much greater hit on my wallet, and I won't sacrifice rolling resistance for weight. Lighter weight bikes are just plain more fun to ride! It matters not where you shed the weight, but generally there's more weight loss to be had in the wheelsets, so that's pretty much where everyone starts.

Now's when you ask, "what about losing 10 lbs body weight instead?" It ain't the same. I lose ten pounds or so after winter and start to get in shape. Yes there's less total weight you have to pull around, and the engine gets better, but it ain't the same. Give me five pounds off the bike anyday.

Lighter weight rims and tires do have some advantages but I doubt few of us will go fast enough to realize it. Descending at 45 mph or so the light stuff leans into the turns better. The gyroscope effect is less so it doesn't want to "stand up" and alter your line. This effect is real and I've felt the difference a few times. That was years ago. Now you won't catch me going 45 on a bicycle unless I go off a cliff.

The aero spoke thing? On the stand with the wheel maintaing 20 mph, you feel a lot more "wind" off the wheel with 32 round spokes than 16 aero spokes. Real world? I don't think there's any advantage until you get rid of the flailing legs and that big sail sitting in the saddle.

If you get through this long-windedness, thanks for allowing me to spout off!