Bought a scale yesterday. Thought it would be fun to weigh my bikes.

Here is the 1989 Bridgestone MB-1 with a 1994 XT group except FC M563 LX cranks and "modern" Shimano M324 spd/cage pedals (filled with lead I suspect...). On the other hand it does not have a bottlecage.

195? oh the bike! I have no idea, because the bike isn't the problem!

Sorry - bare in mind I am not English speaking - What does your comment mean - "195?"?

I have the same scale. My advice would be to buy a better one. They are anything but accurate.

He's making a joke about how he weighs 195 pounds, and that the weight of the bike isn't as important because his own weight is more relevant to his overall speed.

Admittedly, it gets lost a bit in translation.

Nice Bridgestone, though. Thanks for posting!

He means he weighs 195 lbs (88.4) Kilograms so the weight of the bike doesn't matter

I weigh my bikes on a scale very similar to that. It was sold on eBay as a fish scale. I don't have a good way to hang it, so I typically just hold it and lift the bike with the hook. It doesn't stabilize to a single number that way, but I can usually figure out about more or less what it's telling me, probably within the accuracy of the scale. In addition to pounds, ounces, and kilograms, mine will tell me the weight of things in Jin. I haven't had a use for that, but I could do it if I did. Also, the ghost of my freshman college physics professor insists on reminding me that kilograms are a measure of mass, not weight.

Those pedals are good but heavy.... steel cages.
Those who post the weight of their bikes without a picture with the scale... well, they are liars.

Aha! Thanks. Well I am well over 90 kg... I am not weighing my vintage bikes because it would matter in any perfomance kind of way. I do it because 1 - It is fun to know and 2 - there are a lot of fantasy weight quotes floating around on the net.

But it's very precise.

I kind of look at this like I do the pressure gauge on my pump. As long as it's consistent, I'm happy. I can weigh a new bike and know which of my other bikes are about the same weight. Usually all of them, +/- 2 pounds. Within that range I don't think weight is even the dominant factor in the way the ride of the bike feels.

I don't see the problem. Stygg's scale says 12.18, and it is reasonable to assume it is indicating kilograms. The conversion factor for kilograms (mass) to pounds (force) is 2.2 kg per pound. The calculation of that factor includes the conversion from mass to force. The necessary factor is the acceleration due to gravity, which is usually considered a standard value. Multiply 2.2 times 12.18. So the resulting weight of Stygg's mountain bike is 26.8 pounds, which is certainly plausible for a mountain bike.

Again, I don't see a problem. It seems to be a 27# bicycle.

What kind of errors are we worried about, and are they large enough to challenge this answer for any practical purpose?

I will check my scale for accuracy.

Here is another frame+fork i did today:
My darkest vintage bike moment...

Cannot be that far off.

PS - please do not make this thread about performance. It is not.
PS II of course it is kilograms - I am European.

I have that same scale. I wonder how accurate it is. It seems very cheap.

I thought I had a picture in my Flickr stream. Here's what I found.



What? I should have shown the bike in the picture too? Well, it's too late for that now. It was this one.



Non-vintage bike for comparison. I did it again.



But trust me, it was this one.

There's your problem. The acceleration due to gravity is not constant. It varies based on location. On the moon, for instance, that's still a 12.18 kg bike, but it's weight would only be about 4.5 pounds. Even just taking it to Mexico City would drop the weight to about 26.7 pounds. BTW, it is clear that I was joking, right?

Anybody have any experience with the Park Tool hanging scale? I'm thinking of getting one.

Haha! Next bike I weigh I will let you know both pounds and Kg. So you who are stuck in medieval times can relate...

I am really curious on some of the bikes - the Masi/Ferretti/Monark (with a lot of light stuff and tricks) and the Merckx MX Leader with modern Super Record 11. They feel light but it could just be my wishful thinking/feeling.

This all brings up a good point, I have a Berkley fish scale I use. Got a frame the seller was very detailed with the weight of, 4lb 12.7 oz frame and 1lb 8.8oz fork = 6lb 5.5oz total on his "Postal scale". Frame came and weighs 7lb on my scale, checked my scale with 1, 2 and 10lb weights and it is spot on. By itself not a huge deal or deal breaker per se, but why is nothing ever straightforward? The weight was just one of several things that collectively add up to quite a bit more than I like to let go.

Screw an eye bolt into a stud in the garage ceiling, loop of rope, zip ties, wire to adjust drop with a carabiner so you can move the scale.

No experience, they should be good for the $$$. I think a fishing scale should be fine, mine is spot on after years of use and was very cheap when I bought it.

Yes I paid 6 bucks for mine they are cheap. I can weigh the same bike 3 times and weight can vary as much as a kilo and a half.

In addition to the method of clamping the scale in my workstand (as seen in my pictures above), I've also had success hanging it from a U-lock hanging from the stand.

Yes, the scale does not lie, but you do have to get a decent enough scale, or suffer the doubts from others when you call out your bike's weight in any forum.....

Case in point, my recently finished Davidson build. I myself couldn't believe the sub 20 pound weight, considering it's a steel bike with a Brooks saddle and steel epinrpes and adpes.....but there it is,........ on my overpriced digital bike scale I just bought last summer (used to weigh my bike on a digital luggage scale)....

HAHAHAHA due to the reflection I kept reading that as 13.89 lbs and thought this a supremely clever joke post. Was trying to figure out what might really be hanging on there, just out of frame. My favorite was a big ol' fish.