Originally Posted by
City_Smasher
If frame weight was inconsequential as you say, racers wouldn't be seeking out the lightest frame they can get their hands on.... When was the last time you saw someone riding in the Tour de France or the Italia' de Giro on a 30+lb bike?
How much do you know about pro racing?
In the 2008 Tour de France, Sastre beat Evans by 58 seconds. That's after more than
87 hours and
2200 miles of racing. Sprinters win races by a fraction of a second. A tough climbing stage can mean 20,000 feet of climbing with a 120 mile distance. I.e., pros are in situations where a performance difference that is inconsequential for a non-pro -- even a dedicated (albeit non-competitive) randonneur -- actually matters. As I mentioned in my last post.
Oh, and in case you didn't know, time trial bikes (including those used by pro road racers) are typically heavier than a standard road bike (by 4 pounds or more), but substantially faster. Similarly, aero wheels are both heavier and faster than standard wheels. I know the reason why.... Do you?
Originally Posted by City_Smasher
A 32lb bike is going to be slower going up an 8% grade, than a 15lb bike.
Yes, it will. By about 0.4 miles per hour. On a 1-mile 8% grade climb, that's 41 seconds slower. Critical for a pro racer, meaningless for a non-competitive randonneur.
By the way, a 30 pound steel road bike will run you about $1,000. Compare that to $7,000 for a 15 lb carbon fiber road bike. Doesn't sound worth it to me.