Originally Posted by
Six jours
I was afraid to post it because my arithmetic skills are truly awful. But something just didn't seem right...
I think it's a good illustration of the idea that "XX bike part is worth XX time/speed/distance" can't ever be true, at least as a general statement. And maybe a good illustration of why we shouldn't pay too much attention to such claims to begin with.
That's ok I don't often quote stuff like that but I was lazy
, on a personal experience note. I've never lost 50lbs but I have lost 30lbs. I also have a set training route that I use for climbing training. It's 8 miles long and with an average grade of 6% not including a 1mile descent in the middle. I looked at my ride log and got the following information:
When I was 250lb it took me 1:18+/-minutes to do that climb after dropping to 220lbs my time on that same climb dropped to 37 minutes. Some of that has to do with conditioning though I hadn't taken a break off the bike at the time so take it for what it's worth.
There is no way that I would say weight is irrelevant. That would be a fallacy. Weight makes a difference (primarily when you are climbing). The real question is, does it matter you? If it does then the question becomes do you want to take the easy way and buy the weight savings or the harder way and work it off.
