Just weighed my 1979 Fuji Gran Tourer (aluminum wheels and fenders, plus rear rack) and found it comes in at a whopping 34 pounds! My comfortable cruising speed is about 9 mph, which seems pretty slow compared to what most folks on here have mentioned.
To be honest I've probably invested more money in this thing than it deserves - got it in 2020 during the pandemic bike shortage so I felt lucky to have a bike, it's still the nicest bike I've had, and I like how it looks. Getting a new VO crankset improved the gearing which helps significantly on the moderate inclines you get here in Baltimore, but biking can still be a slog sometimes..
That said, I can't help wondering whether I'd be having more fun with a lighter bike. I want it to be a workout, but I also would love to be able to ride a bit longer, farther, and faster without it being grueling.
In my basement, I have what I think is a Peugot UO10 I inherited from my grandfather, but it's disassembled and needs an overhaul. But from what I gather that bike isn't really much of an upgrade, if any, from the Fuji.
What do you all think? Do I just have unrealistic expectations as to how much better a lighter steel or aluminum bike would be?

So many factors to consider.

When I'm pushing things I'm usually out for 20-40 miles with moderate inclines, climbing, and curves on a paved riverside trail. I have lots of recent data for how I ride on this route using a 1979 Mercian with cheap 27x1.25" tires, and flat shoes with pedals with cages that weighs 28 pounds compared to a 1986 Schwinn Paramount with nice cotton 24mm 700c tires and clipless pedals that weighs 22 pounds. On the Mercian I typically average 17-18mph, while on the Schwinn I average 19-20mph. So, a few pounds, some nicer tires, and clipless pedals amount to about a 10% increase in speed.

I can get up and sprint or power uphill on the Paramount much better than on the Mercian, which is just an added fun factor for me during my rides and increases the high intensity exercise benefits a lot, so I now prefer riding the Paramount most of the time. There is a minimal loss of comfort during longer rides and more rattling over rough pavement, but otherwise it's a superior ride experience in almost every sense.

-Gregory

That seems…awfully heavy to me. I’d suggest you double check the weight to be sure.
Most of my bikes weigh right around 21-22 pounds without racks, fenders or water bottles mounted.
My touring bikes with racks and fenders are about 27-28 pounds unladen.
Are you carrying around 10-12 pounds of stuff you really don’t need or use that often?

No, that 34 lbs is without anything on the bike, but does include the fenders and rack which are affixed to the bike and pretty necessary for me as I sometimes have to ride in the rain or carry groceries or other backage.

Unless you're racing or want to join fast group rides, outright speed isn't all that important. For me it's all about look & feel, and the bikes I like best are the ones I can poodle around on all day long without feeling tired or bruised or whatever afterwards. In general, those are not my lightest or most expensive bikes, but the ones that fit well, look nice and feel "just right". Whatever that is.

Case in point: this is a rather heavy (32lbs) cheap gaspipe chain store frame with mostly old, well-used parts and cheap Vietnamese tires. Yet I'd choose it over most of my other bikes for a long day out:

Wow! The 17-18 mph is so much faster than my 9 mph. And the Mercian is only 6 pounds lighter than mine. That's wild. Sounds like a nice bike.

Hey that is a pretty looking bike!
I do get pretty tired on my bike. I wonder if I'm just pushing too hard and need to chill out. But also, 9mph seems pretty damn slow.

Also, shoutout to the Vivere link in your signature! As a lover of old jazz and all things Italian, I'm a big fan of Carlo Buti.

With me at least, there's also some psychology at work. On a racing machine I always tend to feel a little guilty when I'm riding at a leisurely pace. On that Halford's, never.

QFT (Quoted For Truth)

My current ride is ~38 pounds w/water bottles on. I thoroughly enjoy and appreciate riding it (on flat ground or downhills) :-)

But you should fix up the Peugeot ... pretty much, no matter what. And take pics, and post them here.

more than I should and slower than I want

I am slow. I have always been slow. I am slower now than I was 35 years ago when I first started riding. I live in the foothills of the Appalachian mountains. Every direction I go is hilly and I am not sure if I would be much faster on flatter ground. I am less slow on my lighter bikes than I am on my heavier bikes.

All that said, I have enjoyed a variety of bikes over the years. Some of them lighter than others. If you want to try riding on a lighter bike, now is a great time to get a good deal on a lighter, vintage bike. Find one you like at a price that you can afford and see what happens. The worst case scenario is that you aren't any faster but you have two bikes instead of one.

Do you have any pictures of your Fuji you can share?

First of all, nobody aside from very fit athletes are 'comfortably cruising' at 20 mph on a bicycle. Everybody else is TRYING. Weight matters when accelerating, and a light bike, especially one with light wheels, can feel quite a bit more responsive and 'lively'. Light weight also helps when climbing. But the old saying "It's not the bike; it's the rider" is as true as ever. Fitness is everything as far as speed on a bike is concerned, and aerobic fitness is the limiting factor for most people. Going fast enough to be breathing hard on a significant portion of your rides will improve your speed much more than any purchase can.

But, is that what you want to do when you are riding? I used to race long ago as a teenager, but until I started riding again during the pandemic, I was desk-bound for 35 years and smoked for 20 of them, so my potential as a speedy bicycle rider was greatly reduced in my adulthood, and I can't blame anyone but myself. To me, just getting out is more important than training, but I'm usually riding fast enough to be breathing hard, out of long habit. I've ridden enough now to reduce my resting heart rate by 10 bpm, but I'm still only averaging 9-12 mph.

By all means, if you think a lighter bike would be fun, go for it!


Blue Bella

Just weighed Blue Bella, as pictured above - 26 lbs of fun. She's 24 1/4 lbs bare, like this:

Blue Bella @ Rio Grande

You could take your rack and fenders off, but why not go n+1?

Have fun!

Perhaps this does not apply, but as gugie knows, I believe taking 5 pounds off your body will make you faster than taking 5 pounds off your bike, particularly if you do any sort of climbing.

Physical conditioning and amount of effort when riding make a larger difference than 5 pounds of bike weight. You say that 9 miles per hour is your "comfortable cruising speed" but many of us who are reporting significantly higher speeds may be working harder than comfortable cruising speed. Some of us like to be exhausted at the end of a ride, strange though it may seem to others. As a personal example my "comfortable cruising speed" (cruising around the countryside, enjoying the view, and not breathing hard) is similar to yours but, on my usual 20 to 40 mile ride, my average speed is in the 14 to 16mph range, but my legs are sore and I usually need a nap after such a ride.
Brent

Physics doesn't care if it's bike weight or body weight, except for minor issues such as the height of the center of mass. There is one significant exception: reducing rotating wheel mass can deliver performance benefits greater than just dead weight savings, as reduced effort is needed to accelerate the wheel rotation. A Schwinn Varsity with racing wheels & sewups can sometimes be faster than an elite-level frame with steel rims and heavy tires.

My primary bike, the Nashbar Flashback "Alumicruiser", could weigh as little as 27 lbs, like its faster near-twin the Alumispeedy. But I have found front & rear racks, fenders, a front basket, and a 2-leg kickstand to be remarkably useful, and so its base unladen weight is around 36 lbs. My older Ross cruiser is about 2 lbs heavier, almost all of it in the frame (light aluminum vs. old swing sets). I like them both, and have over 10,000 miles on the Nashbar and over 21,000 on the Ross.

But for a typical ride I'm leading, I add:
2-4 water bottles at 2 lbs each
my pannier with full tool and first aid kit + long cable lock
my side basket with my fabric cooler in it for leftovers
...plus me, a good 50 lbs over my Cat IV racing weight.

On either the laden Nashbar or the Ross, I can ride comfortably at 11-13 mph all day long. Fortunately, my group is very happy with that pace.

If I switch to the Alumispeedy (same basic frame & wheels as the alumicruiser, light rear rack & racktop bag), I can ride at 14-16 mph at the same effort level, and climb faster. And if I switch over to my Raleigh Pro at 24 lbs full-up with spares & tools, I can ride at 17-19 mph without too much exertion. Spending most of my time on heavier bikes makes the light ones faster when I switch over due to the extra training.

On the other end of the scale (literally), my Chicago-forged chrome Schwinn cruiser with Wald front & rear baskets and steel fenders weighs just under 60 lbs before you put anything else on it. That bike provides a "quality per-mile workout" at 10-12 mph. But it has a 7-speed hub and aluminum rims which help a bit.

Set your bike up for what you need it to do. If you want a faster ride, evaluate if you need to keep items on it, look into wheel & tire upgrades, or better yet obtain a second bike focused on speed. But remember that weight-based speed changes tend to be evolutionary, not revolutionary, unless you splurge for a 15-lb wonderbike. Then, wheeee.

But your bike(s) is/are your bike(s), and unless you're racing or Stravaing, ride the way you want to without comparing yourself to others. And have fun!

Bike weight is a negligible factor in maintaining speed on flat ground.
It comes into play when accelerating, and when climbing.
There is a small contribution from the tires getting squished more by more weight, but that can be counteracted by adding more air and keeping the deformation the same.

If you feel slow because your bike is heavy, there is something else going on.

My heaviest bike was 36 lbs for a while; it's not far from that now. That was too heavy for me, but I couldn't decide what to take off... the fat Schwalbes that never flattened, the dynamo hub and lamp, the front and rear racks, the fenders, the kickstand...

There were lots of pounds, and each one had a function. Hubs are Shimano, rims Velocity. The fork is < 1 kg, the frame is 2700 g, where a "light" steel frame might be 2000. So that's a pound-and-a-half that's due to the "bicycle" as opposed to the stuff bolted on.

As has been said already: set up your bike for what you need it to do.

cheers -mathias

You all need to work on your marketing, I know some of you are downsizing and surely have a lightweight racer with tubs you'd like to offload....

Most of my bikes are in the 22-23 lb range unless it's my sported-up Legend which is 19.8 lbs. If I am riding for exercise, fun, and challenging myself, it's normally a distance of 20-40 miles and I pretty consistently average 17mph over varied terrain. If headwind isn't hammering me, then 18-20mph cruising speed is doable over distance, and nearer to 30 if I have a decent tailwind. Casual speed is 13-15 mph, and it doesn't really matter the weight of the bike as they're all about the same.

34 seems heavy for a nicer bike with aluminum racks and fenders. But that isn't the most important thing in the world for a utility bike.

My suggestion: Buy a cheap, old "fast" bike off Facebook or Craigslist. Spend $100-200 on a '90s Cannondale, Lemond or Trek 1200 (etc) with skinny tires in a good size. It will weigh around 21 pounds or less. It might not be the ultimate fast bike by today's standards, but it will tell you very quickly what you are missing in terms of feel, and you'll have a second bike when you get a flat. When you want to get something else, you'll likely be able to sell it for what you paid.

Do keep in mind that Greg is youngish, pretty darn fit, and has racing experience. (Great guy, BTW - I've had the pleasure of riding with him.) He is just plain faster than you or I. He always will be. Just the way it is.

As for your bike, if you like riding it and like how it looks, I'd say you are in a pretty good place. A lighter, "racier" bike may or may not make you any faster - you'll probably feel faster, but you may not actually be faster. The only way to actually get faster is to ride faster. I'm not being sarcastic here - if you go out and ride at, say, 15 mph for as long as you can, you won't get very far the first time, or the second or third. But if you keep at it, you will find yourself able to go further and further at 15mph.

I'm not saying you shouldn't go out and try other bikes. A lot of us do exactly that and have for years. It can be a great deal of fun. Just be warned that n+1 can be addictive and this hobby can be quite a rabbit hole to fall down.

Neal: "hey Mahk!"
me: "What Neal?"
Neal: "Wanna know how to climb bettah?"
me: "Yeah!?
Neal: "Lose some weight!"

*2017 Eroica California

Since nobody else has mentioned it, how confident are you that the bike is a good fit? Nice bikes feel nicer, but 34 pounds isn't crazy heavy. If the bike is too small to get decent leg extension that would probably slow you down more than a few extra pounds.

OK. 9 mph? That is clearly unacceptable. You need to be faster to have more fun. Your Fuji is holding you back. Build up your grandpa's Peugeot as a stripped down racer with no racks, fenders, lights, not even reflectors like many of us did on the less racy UO-8. You should even cut off the plastic brake lever covers for the aero and weight advantage (kidding. sort of). Come on man--got pics of the Peugeot and its parts? We love this stuff.

I've got a few bikes to choose from when going out for a ride. I often choose my Schwinn Continental. It is heavy by "lightweight" bike standards. My other bikes are lighter and also enjoyable. If I get home from a ride 5 minutes earlier because I went faster, my wife won't give me an award, a star or a damn. Don't sweat it. Ride often and the your speed may increase or perhaps you'll notice more stuff along the way. By the way, those fast guys see as much as we do along the way, perhaps less.

A side comment: When I was racing or training, I didn't see what was around me. It could have been beautiful, it could have looked like the surface of the moon, I was focused on the wheel in front of my and what my surrounding riders were doing. Riding for recreation is so much better. And riding on trails rather than on busy roads is so much better.

I'll add that having a bike that feels good is somewhat dependent on it being in good running condition. That is that the bearings in the wheels aren't dragging, the jockey wheels in the rear derailleur aren't gummed up and running smoothly, the crank bearings are running smooth, the chain is oiled or waxed and the wheels are true and never rubbing on the brake blocks. Often when I ride my bikes they seem to move along pretty good on level roads. One more thing that I'll add is that tires are important. Good quality tires feel smoother and may take a little less energy to move along. Panasport Pasela's are my preferred tire. Continental Gatorskin's are good if you ride mostly on roads.

Enjoy the ride.

My ‘72 Fuji The Finest is my only >24lb bike sporting 32mm tires and a trunk rack. It is by far my slowest bike but it is also very comfortable and accommodating for townie runs.

That said, I still like to train hard and ride fast (relative to my conditioning). I’ll take a 21lb C&V racer with 23/25mm tires any day. Varying terrain in west MI requires an 18-20mph cruising speed to offset the 12mph climbs in order to net a 17+ avg. For me, this ain’t happening on a wide-tired heavy bike.