Two things.
Don't use a bathroom scale, use a digital scale that hangs from a solid point. Bathroom scales are very inaccurate.
23.2 pounds is a decent weight.

SJX426, Thanks for reminding me, I forgot to include the frame size for the two C'Dales... 58 cm.

noglider, I guess I'm in the minority WRT detecting a small weight difference... I can feel the difference between a road frame and a touring frame, if I ride them back-to-back. I wonder if I'm insensitive to my two primary bike's weight difference because I weigh ~190 lbs.? Bike to bike difference is 16.492% while adding my weight to the equation it becomes a 1.506% difference. A 130 lb. rider would have an overall difference of 6.15% (My math is always suspect!)

Brad

More or less yes. I like to use the gallon of milk analogy. Regardless of your body weight, which would you rather carry up 10 flights of stairs, a gallon of milk of a pint of milk? IMHO your own body is accustomed to it's own weight. Add something extra to lug around and your body has to work more than it otherwise would have had to do.

That being said, you'd be surprised at how easy it is to shed a few pounds off of a vintage bike without sacrificing durability.

What are your most cost effective (money and trouble) ways of lightening a bike?

Number one for me is tires.

Bike manufacturers have been selling "light weight" forever to the cycling public. Just look at all the catalogues from companies like Peugoet that carefully placed weight of their bikes at very noticable locations so it correlates to "the higher the model, the lighter the bike) It was weird though when the middle level model Super Vitus framed PSVs were easily beating the higher model Reynolds framed Peugeot bikes in the weight races during the 80's.....so I ended up with a PSV.........I guess I've been weenie for all these years!!

Chombi

Less ice cream and chips.
I know that if any rider dropped 15 pounds they will find climbing much easier.

^+1

It's not my theory. I was shopping bikes years ago and the topic came up with the LBS owner. He explained this approach which I thought made sense. And he wasn't trying to sell the lightweights or carbons which kind of bolstered his credibility. Now I know he's kind of a local guru of sorts in cycling and collecting in the DC area for many decades.

I'm 8lbs below my "ideal" weight. If I dropped 15 pounds I'd be 1% body fat or less lol.

Anyway, my new Ti Framed bike is 18.5 lbs without pedals. My finished Bianchi with pedals is 22.06lbs.

I just removed the Syntace C2 from the CAAD3. My wrists just didn't like them as much as my Profiles on the other bikes... down 388 grams. I don't think I'll install any aero bars on it (just looks so good without them) so now to make the speedo wiring look decent without having to redo the whole thing... impossible I'll bet.

Brad

Well yeah but I would generally be running the lightest tire that fits my needs anyway so it's unlikely that I would be able to reduce weight by changing tires...at least not without compromising some other factor. I would say wheels, though whether you consider that cost effective is questionable.

Probably the biggest weight gain in my Bottecchia when I set it up to be comfortable and ridable was in the wheel/tire combination. Since this was a few years ago and nice polished box section clincher rims were extremely hard to come by at the time (no V-O stuff then) I ended up using NOS Rigida AL1622 rims. Those are meduim width and don't have hooked beads so that dictated using at least a 25mm wire bead tire. And since I was having trouble finding 25mm tires that were actually 25mm instead of narrower, I went with 28mm. So while I ended up with a quality wheel and good tires that are representative of what a decent touring or sport-touring style bike might have had at the time, they were also 420g each heavier than the tubulars. Today I would probably use a narrow hooked bead rim that would allow a 23-25mm folding bead tire and save quite a bit of weight. I weighed a set of rims/tires like that and they were only 120g or so heavier than the tubulars.

Rode a ten pound bike the other day (actually 9.86 lbs). I've ridden the same model several times before, weighing 16.5 pounds. There was no denying that the ten pound bike felt light while actually riding, and (are you ready for this?) ...it felt faster.

Weenies live on!
An NOS Titanium Stronglight BB just went for 500 bucks at eBay! that's just nuts even in the weenie world. I was thinking 250 - 300 buck max for it. Imagine what else you can buy with 500 bucks out there?!...an SLX frame, or even a nice whole bike??
I don't even bother bidding against high roller items like those anymore even though the weenie in me long for them.........just wait till I win the lotto and I'll show them what a real high bid looks like!

Chombi

188 grams? $500? I can beat that for weight $150.

Fascinating thread, I think.

I'm gonna go out and say it right here - it's all a matter of proportions, perspective, and.....money. I'm a Super Clyde - right around 325 at the moment. Hold that thought. I got a '99 Schwinn Peloton, minus wheels, from a really skinny rider (he kept the rolf vectors, lol). It's a Reynolds 853 frame (probably made by the same folks that did the Lemond bikes), but I haven't stripped it to see what it really weighs. I've toyed with the idea of building it up with SRAM Rival, 3T stem/bars, Thompson Elite seatpost, San Marco Concor Light saddle, Look Keo Classic pedals. So I went to Competitive Cyclist and played with the build calculator (fun!) and for a whopping $1900 'built' everything but the frame/fork/headset. With a Mavic Askium wheelset, everything weighed 13.04 pounds. I'd figure the frame/fork/Ritchey headset couldn't weigh more than 7 pounds all told, so for a $2200 total investment I'd have a 20# steelie.....cool, eh? Well, not so fast! There's that little problem of the obvious foolishness of spending $2200 for a 20# steelie when you weigh so much yourself! Plus, would the wheels even hold up? Of course, I considered the SRAM groupset partly so I could move the Ultegra/DA stuff to another frame of some sort, but it would be so much cheaper and easier to just get a Mavic OP wheelset/cassette, and get to riding. At about $300 all told a much wiser investment.

Do you folks see where I'm going with this? Different people have different needs versus wants, but there's always going to be a middle ground with a fuzzy gray area on each end. Sure I like to dream of riding a 15# Pinarello, but that won't make me or anyone else healthier just because. Quite the opposite. If we all REALLY wanted to get a better workout, we'd ride Varsities! (btw - did you know that a 22" Varsity frameset, nothing else, weighs almost 13 pounds on the bathroom scale all by itself? Just about as much as everything I built up on that ride calculator? And to think people try to sell the darn things for sometimes absurd prices. But that's for another time

BTW does anyone happen to know what a '99 54cm Peloton frame/fork/headset DOES weigh? See, I'm getting a nice tax refund next year, and......

Tom

I'm aware of what my bikes weigh because it makes a difference on hilly rides or when I'm trying to ride with a group that's faster than I usually ride. I found road bikes over 22lbs tend to slow me down, under 20 tends to make me feel good about the bike. I have one C&V bike, a Fuji Team that fits into the under 22lb club. I don't think any other can make that claim but I'm not sure about the 86 Ironman.
I'm also aware of what I weigh. So last year I set out to lose weight and I did. I'm down 37 lbs.

Think of it, I was carrying around a spare Schwinn Varsity......with chrome wheels!

rat fink, I wouldn't get within 10 feet of a bike that light for fear that something would happen and I'd have to buy it!

Brad

Boy do I hear you. I started at 238 and last Friday was 188. So what if my Brooks B17 has some weight. It's given me the comfort I need to keep putting in the miles.

To put it in perspective for you, my '79 Raleigh Pro (Reynolds 531) with a B17, full campy Record/NR gruppo and tubular rims (with not-especially light tires) weighed in at 23 lbs. My '88 Nishiki Modulus (Tange #2) with full Shimano Exage parts and Cheng Shin 700X23c tires riding a pre-softened NOS Brooks Professional saddle is about 23.5. One is top of the line, the other is a mid-level bike 10 years later. I'd say that you have a good weight there. Besides, it's been my experience that going much lighter than 23 lbs on a steel bike is approaching nearly too light. Then again, I'm a masher who rides my bikes like I'd ride a redheaded adulterer...dropping spoke numbers and going with lighter (and almost inherently) lighter parts would just lead to breakage with my riding style. I find that for an everyday bike with fenders and a B17 running about 27 lbs is perfect - light enough to toss, heavy enough that I feel it's a solid, long-distance performer.

ETA: Remember, lightening your rotating mass is a whole lot better than lightening the bike itself. In drag-racing, there's a formula that lists something like 5 lbs from your wheels lowers your 1/4 mile time by a tenth. In bike terms - get a bike and swap from steel to aluminum rims - you'll feel infinitely lighter, even if nothing else on the bike changes.

If you're looking at losing weight, I'd start with the tires. With 700c, you can go anywhere from 500g (or more) to 250g. It might not sound like a lot, but trust me, it is. Also, although it sounds counterintuitive, don't worry too much about tire width if you're already running 23c tires...20c feels faster to me, but I can't tell a difference with any swap from 23c to 28 or even 32c tires, except for comfort, which will make you faster whether or not you are losing any weight.

my 61cm lugged steel bike (tommasini tecno) comes in at 21.5lbs (according to a digital fish scale) complete with pedals and boat anchors for wheels. with a proper tubular wheelset i could flirt with 20lbs.

that said, i would say your bike is doing very well. weights not a huge deal. my modern aluminum bike is several pounds lighter and i cant tell the difference (other than ride quality obviously)

For those of you who do not understand the need to reduce the weight of a tool, try holding a pound of butter at arm's length. Keep your arm parallel to the floor and see how long you can hold it before the pain begins.

I offer this example of how weight of a tool, and a bike is really only a tool, can impact usability. Lighter bikes are faster and more agile, all other things being equal. It is simply a matter of math.

As for body weight? My guess is that a 100 pound woman (or man) will be able to hold the pound of butter just about as long as a three hundred pounder. But that is just a guess.

What can I say, I like to live on the Edge! I've driven cars that cost more than a mid-sized home, a few times. I just consider it a perk.

Yet the old heavy steel Schwinn circuit I just bought as a back up has just given me the two fastest times I've ever posted on my evening 20 mile circuit. Oh and my normal bike is a light CF Trek that is currently broke. So while on principle I agree that lighter is better I do believe that many other variables come into play also.