so is doing it by hand. example below.

is 1 lbs difference a big deal in a climbing situation?

I mean is it worth spending an extra $200 to get a 15 lbs bike than a 16 lbs bike?

If you are a competitive racer - $200/lb is a great deal. 15#->14# $500/lb is a great deal and 14#->13# $1,000/lb is a great deal.
Not worth it if the stuff does not work as well.
Depends how much time and money you put into the sport, but assuming you race 20-70X a year and drive to 30-50 hours and have (retail) $5K+ bike then easy.

Yes.

I'm looking at dengfu frames see.. the venge imitation is made from T700 carbon, and has more aero looking shapes. the tarmac imitation is T800, almost a pound lighter, but probably won't be as aero. I wish they made the FM098 from T800, for the weight savings.

I would much rather have an aero bike for breakaway/bridging situations. but I don't know how much 1 lbs matters in a hilly race.

I thought you had a Ridley Noah or something like that?

Regardless, I wasn't a big fan of the Venge. Had one for a few months and went back to my TCR. How good are the dengfu replicas? Will the Venge be as aero or will it be a bit different and have greater drag? Will the Tarmac really hit the weight as spec'ed?

Matters a lot. How much? San Dimas uphill TT 1lb means about 10sec for a relatively fast 140 rider on a 15# bike vs. a 16# bike.
Its not going to make much difference in a pack, but uphill alone - weight matters. Aero matters too - flats and alone. Flats in a group aero matters less. We have both (Tarmac, Venge) and have put the bucks into the aero to get it light. If you win on sprints - different deal.

oh man you're talking me into another bike. I don't like it

I do have a ridley noah, and I have a venge. I'm selling both, along with another that I was actually racing last year.. yeah.... I'm getting rid of all my **** before I pull the trigger on dengfu.

based on my searches, fm098 is a solid choice. dengfu is a good manufacturer. not sure if the fm098 (venge) is very aero, but judging by its shapes, I'm guessing it's close, even though it wasnt tested in the tunnel. I'd rather race that in crits than the venge because it's cheaper. the fm208 (tarmac) is supposedly 1160g for frame/fork. that's all I know. if you find anything new, let me know

the dengfu rep told me the fm098 is around 1500g

the difference between venge and fm098 are subtle. fm098 doesn't have a tapered head tube, tapered down tube, less slope on the top tube, no proprietary headset spacer. all minor differences.

if they made a T800 version of the fm098, I'd be on top of that lickity split

[MENTION=313468]spectastic[/MENTION] - bad news early is good news. The bad news is you will buy several bikes. The good news is you can budget for it.
Before carbon (and huge R&D mold costs) it was common for racers to have different bikes for different events. The "in" thing was have a bike fit to your dimensions. I did that, and was not so impressed as things like material, position mattered way more.
Anyway, the type of riding you do has a lot to do with the bike you ride. That exciting Tour of California this week, Sagan road a different bike up Baldy than he did in the final stage (I think Tarmac then Venge). When he road Paris-Roubaix he didn't ride a Roubaix, he road a Tarmac. How you ride should determine what you ride, but more importantly the position you ride. Mathematics and physics can prove things on paper, but riders do not ride like calculations are calculated. They move side to side, surge and distribute power differently. Anyway net...
If money is not an object - buy several bikes.
If it is...fool around with things like stems, bars, seat position, wheels and save the bucks on changing frames right now. Work on position and try to figure out what kind of rider you are. The frame is the 1st or 2nd most important part, but changing it is a much bigger decision than doing the other smaller stuff from both a cost and time perspective.

according to cervelo, the tipping point where a lighter weight bike out performs an aero bike is 5% grade. it's not mentioned how much delta is in the weight or the aero drag, or the weight of the rider. but that's on a solo effort. the argument against aero in a peloton is that drafting takes away a lot of that resistance (30%? or somethin lik that?) in any case, it's been tested quite a bit, that aero bikes shave minutes off a long effort, whereas light bikes shave off seconds, and this is still true on hilly stages.

I may just say screw it, and buy a light bike and an aero bike, along with a cross/touring/commuting bike, a mtb in the future, and possibly a tt bike if I become competitive in that realm. a lot of **** to store and take care of..

Why are you churning the fleet? Midlife cleanse or something?

He's too young for midlife cleanse. Probably just overthinking it.

I wrote a while back about going to narrower bars. They came in last Friday and I installed them, tried them out on a fast ride Saturday. They were remarkably easy to get used to. I went from 44cm to 40cm. I used the measurements from the tip of the saddle to the hoods to set the hoods' positions...now the drops feel too close. Probably just the difference in design between the two bars. Overall, I like the change.

Been researching the same thing and a ton of people seem to praise smaller bars. Savings in watts, more comfortable, etc. My biggest fear is I am low and compact, and my knees may bump the elbows.

Small bars counter point.

I have the 3T Scatto bars that I think are 35 cm that I use on the track primarily for team sprint. These became popular when it was discovered that they were worth about .1 seconds in a flying 200 meters versus standard width bars.

However, the narrower width reduces leverage on the standing start. I suspect for road sprinters, leverage may be a big deal when the sprint is launched depending on how strong one is in the upper body and how much one throws the bike.

Also, bars that are narrower than the shoulders change the angle of the arms in the shoulder sockets. This may or may not be a problem.

I had narrower bars on my road bike and went back to wider bars for comfort. I have broad shoulders.

So like most aspects of cycling, IMO, bar width is a big depends and will require a period of time for S&A to take place before there are benefits.

I believe the tests, but think about how you will be racing and those tests may not be as relevant to you. Aero bikes are not the most predominant in the pro peloton. And what the pros do and the roads they ride also may not be relevant to your races. But they may be more so than bikes in a wind tunnel. If hills are part of your RRs then you may appreciate weight/ride over aero.

For my son the frame is less important than his setup. His drops are 44 cm and hoods are 38cm. I think he gets the best of both (aero and power sprints). The basic dimensions of seat to bar, heights etc. are maintained (when he doesn't grow) from bike to bike and his body is pretty flat/aero.

Hermes makes a good point about narrow bars and torso width. I'm on 40's because my shoulder width is very close to 40cm. On the hoods and drops, my arms are not tucked in or splayed out, they are lined up with the bars. I have no breathing issues. Enough people in the forum that have ridden in the field with me can tell you that the fit looks right. I would caution bigger riders going to narrower bars for some perceived advantage. It might not end up that way.

I'm debating to make some changes in my cassette/chainrings. Right now I have 53/42 crank with 8 speed 12-23 cassette, thinking of at least going 12-25 and possibly change the 42 to 39. This is on mid 90's 105 components. I do ok with what I have now, but there are some times when 42/23 is too much of a grind. On the other hand, I find the 42 to be a very good general purpose ring, I actually do a lot of riding on it, but it would be nice to have a little more differentiation between the two chainrings. Anyway, no real question here, just thinking out loud (and I actually think I may have posted something like this in the past).

is your FTP over 4.5 w/kg? If no, why are you not riding a compact with a 28t?

FWIW, i've been over 4.5 in the past, and there's nothing you can do to make me swap my 50/34t and 11/28t for something else, unless that something else is a 11/36t

Where do you measure your shoulders?

I used pit-to-pit, just under the shoulder joint.

Never really considered it before, but I may go from 50/34 to 52/36 on my TT bike. Last week we had a nice tailwind, and while I wasn't spinning out my 50x11 I was in it a lot.

On my road bike, I'll probably stick with the 50/34, because, Baldy, Oak Glen, Onyx etc.

52/36 is best of both worlds imo.

my shoulders measure 40, but I use 42 because they're more comfortable

and I'm not in mid life cleansing. I've got at least 70 years ahead of me ffs. I'm going to make larry king look like honey boo boo before I'm gone