Bike Weight
 

Does anyone else laugh about bike weight debates? I know it might be flawed logic, but I am not going to worry that my road bike weighs 25lbs when my 230#'s is the motor for it. MAYBE if I drop 30 and am a borderline Clyde I will worry about lighter bikes, butthe easiest and cheepest way to lighten my load is to ride more and eat less, not switch out my bar or fork.

No, I buy into it a little bit...

a 25# bike is pretty heavy and maybe takes more effort to ride. a 20# bike might feel more responsive & let you go faster. I like going faster.

Obviously, dropping weight off the rider will help many, many things but just because I'm a lardass doesn't mean i want to ride a crappy bike either.

Now, having said that, I don't worry about stem weights, or which RD weighs more than which, I'm worried more about performance and capability, and the better performing parts are generally the lighter ones by nature.

Yes, when other riders say "you need light climbing wheels like mine" I think its silly when they can't keep up with this clyde on a climb!:D IMO, a good strong rider will dust me riding heavy Deep V's or superlite $2,000 10 spoke wheels.:D

I think most lite stuff purchases are for fashion and the cool factor.;)

It depends on the type of riding being done.

If all 230 pounds of me was complaining about needing a full CF rig with low-count deep wheels, wing bars, and and aero seat mast for a 25 mile recreational weekend ride around the park, heck yeah I'd expect people to laugh. It's unnecessary and won't do any good.

When all 230 pounds of me complains about wanting to lighten up the load on my rando bike by a pound and a half it doesn't sound significant, until you consider the math. Over the course of a hilly 100km segment it may only save me 2 minutes...
Link 4 of those segments together and it becomes 8 minutes, and I might need that time for a flat repair or a navigation correction in the middle of the night on a 400k brevet. On a 600k, it piles up to be enough time for a quick nap.

It's like looking at generator hub resistance, and initially you might look and say "Pfft. What's 1.5% in the overall scheme of things?"
If you're riding serious, timed long distance events like randonneurs do, it can be significant. Over the course of a 1200km event with a 90 hour time limit, that 1.5% effort totals up to 80 minutes, which could be the difference between making a control or DNFing.

I don't care much about going faster. In fact, heavy bikes have advantages. If you're trying to lose weight, the extra weight of a heavy bike increases the effort and therefore you're burning more calories, so that's good, right?

I buy it a little, my mountain bike, as from the shop is 14½kg, as it sits right now it's 16kg (fenders, racks, lights, panniers, it all adds up) the road bike is 11kg, so 5kg lighter, I notice it on acceleration and on hills, that the total package is less hefty. Now that's 5kg about 11 pounds, that's quite a difference, where it gets debatable is when you have a rider talking about how switching from his old 106g brifters to his new 105g brifters makes him 10km/h faster.....

Here is the general rule that I follow, when a component needs to be replaced, if the next model up is less then 10% more expensive then an exact replacement, then I'll shift up a model. There is are two exceptions to this though, first is if I feel the exact replacement is not made as well as it should be, then I'll shift up a model. Second, if an exact replacement is no longer being made then I'll buy whatever I like. If the only difference is the weight, then I'll pass.

I really don't buy into it when we're debating two bikes that are close to start with. If we're debating beach cruiser vs road bike, then yes.

I think good tires make a bigger differnce than a pound here or there.

I buy it, but I'm now a Clyde by height (6'5" 190 lbs). I like ultralight backpacking too. My observation is that the weight that you always carry around isn't as big of a deal because you're used to it and your muscles are used to it and sized accordingly. All of the sudden adding weight to your bike or back makes a noticeable difference.

Let's put it this way. I lost 40 pounds a couple of years ago. I didn't get that much faster. I get a LOT faster when I ride my road bike versus commuter, which is maybe a 5-10 pound difference (yes, there are more factors like wheels, geometry, etc.).

Weight matters. And a couple of pounds off the bike makes more of a difference than a couple of pounds off the rider. Certainly the weight difference between a road bike and a tourer or mtb is big, and noticeable. But the OP is right, in general. Unless you're racing, modest differences in bike weight really don't matter all that much, and it's pretty ludicrous to invest hundreds of dollars in Zipp wheels if you're thirty pounds overweight.

For me, it's a bit like kayaks. Mine is 17.5 feet long, and about 65 lbs. I'd love to have a carbon/kevlar or wood 30 pound kayak. This won't make that much difference while paddling, but will be great for porting the boat. Now that I'm starting to be able to take my bike into the mountains, that moment of lifting it over the car's roof would be nice on a CF featherweight bike.

Otherwise, though, losing 10 lbs of rider seems about the same as losing 10 lbs of bike.

If you're debating ounces then it's pretty silly especially as a Clyde. If you're debating pounds, depending on where they are it can make a big difference in the way a bike rides or handles. A lot is about quality as well. Lighter is often higher quality and so it isn't just that a part is lighter but that it functions better/smoother which can make a tangeable difference.

It's not the same, though. Think about it in terms of 2 backpackers. If losing weight from the hiker was the same as losing weight from the pack, then all other skill/strengths being equal:
Hiker A
200 pounds
20 pound pack

should be equivalent to Hiker B
180 pounds
40 pound pack

But rarely is that the case. Similar with bikes, skis, skates, etc. Weight off the device is going to be a more noticeable impact than weight off the rider.

I hear ya ... and I'm sure hiker B is going to be a lot more tired when they both get to camp. ( And I'm picturing them camping near Melakwa Lake. ) But how much of this comes down to where the weight is? On your back, it's supported by your back and by your leg muscles. Beneath you, you're still having to carry it up the hills, but it doesn't seem like as much of a burden.

Of course, at 40 to 60 miles on a weekend, my rides are "short." :D My shoulders start to get sore after a few hours in the saddle, and I have a very different experience of a 30 minute ride than a 4 hour one. So it could be that my riding hides some of this from me.

Not for a rider who has body fat to lose. Losing ten pounds of fat or bike will change the power to weight ratio in just the same way. Hill climbing will be just the same either way. The rider who lost the weight might well be faster, because he's likely to have done it by getting on the bike and racking up miles. Of course, the guy with the lightweight bike might work harder, because he's got this super-expensive bike and it's supposed to be faster.

If you've lost the weight by losing muscle, then your power-to-weight ratio will go down, and climbing will suffer.

The weight doesn't matter as much as people think.

The issue is the total load: bike + rider + load.

http://noping.net/english/

People obsess about weight because it's easy to spend money and it's easy to discuss.

One problem with weight is that it costs a lot to shed "large" amounts of weight from a bicycle and the actual amounts being shed are small!

==================

But the strengths won't generally be equal. Since the 200 lb person is carrying the extra weight all the time, he's going to be used to carrying it on the backpacking trip.

No, bikes are different, since they are vastly more efficient. The effect is much less than people think (play with the above calculator to see). Anyway, aerodynamics has a larger impact on effort/speed (when not going slow).

It's mostly due to aerodynamics (if you are going fast enough).

Hardly true at all! Think about the physical conditioning benefits gained during the training to lose those 10 lbs. If I lose 10 lbs, it takes some serious hill riding to accomplish that. If I sat on my butt, bought a bike 10 lbs ligther, no way will I be just as fit as I would if I had trained my butt of to lose the 10 lbs.:D

You know ... I thought about all of your posts, and a bunch of four letter words, yesterday when I went hill climbing around Seattle on my bike. Tonight I'm going to curse your name running some errands: there's a spot at the top of the hill with a very good price on peonies, but I can only fit one in my backpack at a time. It's only a 400 foot climb, but that's packed into about ten city blocks.

But, you have a good point. I used to wonder why I climbed a particular hill after visiting a nice flat lakeside park; I'd say "I think all week about how much I love bikes, but I freaking hate this. Why don't I just take the flat route home?" And after a month of masochism, I noticed the hill shrinking.

Yes sir! Ya know, last year I trained for a big mtn ride on a Specialized Armadillo (big fat 25). So many riders said they were to heavy along with my Deep V's. Trainign rides were 4,000-7,000 ft climbs But after getting into shape, none of them could keep up even with their superlite super rolling lightweight tires.:D

To me, I benefit from the conditioning it takes to get there!:)

GO ahead, call me names, swear at me, just make it up that hill darnit!:D

Let's see... my recumbent set up for commuting:
2 panniers
trunk bag
camera
2 tubes
tools
laptop
lunch
clothes
pump
2 full water bottles
lights
spare batteries for lights

Total bike weight (minus rider!) is about 70 lbs. I haven't weighed the LHT similarly equipped, but it has a front rack, and the ability to haul more stuff. :)

I'll weigh in on this one. I am riding primarily two bikes right now. My trusty, almost vintage Miyata 721, and a brand new REI Safari. The Miyata is a sport touring road bike currently equiped with 700C26mm tires. The Safari is called a trekking/touring bike by REI. It has 26"x1.75 tires. I have both bikes set up to almost identical seat to pedal and seat to primary hand position on the handlebars so I think aerodynamics are pretty much a wash. Bike weight are very close by subjective measure. I am somewhat quicker on the Miyata based on elapsed times for similar ride loops.

I attribute the difference in speed to two factors. The heavy, fat tires on the Safari take noticeably more effort to accelerate; this includes climbing hills. I have to concentrate on spinning so I don't over stress my knees on the Safari.

The Safari has a much more laid back geometry and being nearly new, I am not as confident in its handling. On the Miyata, the years of familiarity allow me to fluidly move off the saddle to standing to crest a hill or accelerate away from a stop. Its almost like dancing with the bike, as the tires sing against the road surface and the whole body gets involved in the rhythmically moving the bike down the road.

So IMO at least one part of the weight vs speed equation is rotating mass.

my rapids 42/28 gear is much easier to move than my nishiki's 40/28 gear. i'm quite confident the difference is in the Nishiki being 7 lbs heavier with 4 lbs of that being in the wheels alone.

:)

There is a sweet spot, like many other things, where up to that point you can lose a lot, for a relatively small investment. For example, say you have and older bicycle with steel bars, they are rusty and crusty, weigh 764g and are bent all to ****. Now for $35 you can get a nice AL bar, that weighs 310g, nice weight saving of a pound, they are not rusty or crusty and are a nice classic bar shape. You can also for $197 go for a carbon bar that weighs 191g an additional saving of 119g, for only $280 you can get a carbon bar that weighs 189g a huge weight saving of 2g for $83. There are of course guys who will say that that 2g saving is worth $83 and those bars make them 16km/h faster. Most of us clydes would probably be happy with the $35 bars that are heavier, because we know that we can lose 119g, visiting the bathroom.

or in the case of my Nishiki, simply put new aluminum wheels on in place of the old steel and for 60 bucks shed 3-4 lbs. I'm sure I can swap out my steel seat post and steel bars and get it down another couple lbs and heck, nashbar has 1" carbon fiber forks for under $100 bucks so if I might go with that too.

Often people look at my bike and ask why I brought my touring bike out on a club ride, when that IS my club ride bike. I wouldn't even begin to tell them about all the stuff in my bar bag and saddle bag (first aid kit, 3 tubes, spare tire, sunscreen, towel, CO2, pump, lights, etc)...though once when carrying my big saddle bag on a 50 mile club ride someone did ask what was in it, and I honestly replied "library books I need to remember to return, nothing will make you remember to return 8 pounds of books like carrying them 50 miles"

I'll worry about the weight of the bike when the weight of the rider is under control.