tsl

No, you're not speaking only for yourself there.

I've often described my Litespeed as a prosthetic. My brain extends my body map to it instantly and instinctively, as if compensating for a birth defect or accidental dismemberment.

As a result, I've made the contact points of all my bikes identical within a MM. I've equipped them as closely to identical as possible as well.

The pedals and saddles are the same makes and models, the bars of two are identical make, model and size, with the third being extremely close, and the hood shapes are also identical being from the same series, although the commuters are 5600-series 105, and the Litespeed has 7800-series Dura-Ace.

As for my commuters, my Portland comes closest to the prosthetic feeling. Perhaps 85% of the time it disappears from my awareness. Well, maybe not so much in winter with the studded tires.

The Ribble, with its low-trail front end, has significant handling differences. It takes a few days, maybe a week of riding it exclusively before the prosthetic effect kicks in. But, when I switch back to one of the other bikes, it takes only a quarter-mile or so for that feeling to return.

kickstart

In my area, most roads are chip seal or poor condition, and my commute includes rail crossings, light bikes and skinny tires make for a rough, uncomfortable ride.

snow_echo_NY

i have my surly crosscheck built out like a road bike and i'm faster on it than i ever was on my road bike. my crosscheck is about 24 lbs.

i think it's the wheels and rack you have. unless you get a 15 lb road bike i personally don't think it would be worth getting a new bike.

grolby

@tjspiel has done a good of explaining it - there's a mindset in not caring about "1-2 lbs" (in scare quotes because that is a wide variance, not a small amount) that means you're probably not going to do a light weight build except for the frame. Which is probably why I see so many people talking about their 30 lb Cross-Check builds here. The paradox is that you can actually have a lighter Cross-Check. Without much effort or money, I built one to about 22 lbs. But then those 2 lbs start looking like a big deal. Dropping almost 10% of total weight just with a different frame and fork is pretty major.

As for missing the point, people are always popping in to point out that a heavier bike will not be much slower than lighter one, as though this is some big secret that no one who prefers lighter bikes has figured out yet. It's true that any improvements in speed are small, but first of all, there's no escaping the fact that the improvements are real. The "don't bother, it's only a few seconds on a climb" argument assumes that no one should care about a few seconds. Some people do! But that's a very minor point. Much more importantly, a light bike feels very, very different from a heavy one. It moves more easily beneath you, it feels livelier, it tends to make you feel less like you are operating a machine and more as though you are just flying along the road. This might not appeal to everyone, but it does to a lot of people and it's really not about the real difference in speed.

grolby

Tires, sure, but my experience is that bike weight has f*** all to do with ride quality.

ShortLegCyclist

Interesting. I actually do the compete opposite, have my bikes all set up differently, specifically because I enjoy the change of pace.

I also never ride the same bike more than two days in a row for the same reason.

Just finished the Seattle to Portland 2015 event ride this past weekend and the Brooks on my touring bike I used was getting annoying after 206 miles, got home, hopped on the road bike with an Adamo racing saddle and drop bars and it was as if I hadn't spent 12 hours in the saddle at all the past two days as all the pressure points were different between the different saddles and different bike geometries.

ColonelSanders

Thanks for that explanation.

spare_wheel

about 2.5 lbs comes from the frame and fork -- the default surly build is very heavy.

my A commuter:

carbon frame: ~3.4 lbs,
carbon fork: ~1.4 lbs,
carbon wheels: ~4.3 lbs including tubes, rotors, and tires.
stem: ~0.2 lbs
post: ~0.4 lbs
saddle: ~0.4 lbs
chain: ~0.6 gms
crankset: ~1.6 lbs
shifters (flat bar) and road spd pedals: ~1.3 lbs
read and front derailleur: ~0.6 lbs
disc brakes and levers: ~1.9 lbs
bolts, headset, cables, clamps and misc: ~1.5 lb

spare_wheel

there is a relationship between weight and ride feel on the same tires but i mostly agree.

spare_wheel

This is exactly the "feeling" I get when I am on a lighter bike. Thanks for posting.

mconlonx

Keep the Crosscheck for commuting and light touring. No significantly lighter road bike will fit the bill as well for those chores. And pick up a used, late model carbon-framed bike for the weekend rides.

But if you want semi-lite, drop bars, and a rack, I'd be looking at something like the Surly Pacer or Soma ES. Or heck, seems like you have a Trek store nearby, what about a 1.5?

kickstart

Yes and no, weight in of itself doesn't make much of any differenc, but the factors behind the weight do.

RubeRad

I commute on a CrossCheck, here is my experience trying a "faster" bike.

spare_wheel

Can you explain why a low-end carbon frame that can take fenders and a rack is not functionally identical to the crosscheck?

noglider 

For a while, I had both a Cross Check and a Bianchi Volpe. The Bianchi is lighter, so I kept that and sold the Surly. The Bianchi isn't particularly light, but it showed how egregiously heavy the Surly was. I am currently running it with 35mm tires and fenders, so clearance is not a problem.

I agree with the advice to get a light bike for occasions when you want a light bike. The Surly is serving you well at the other times, so don't mess with success.

ColonelSanders

It is just that you said that a Surly built up to the identical specs as your A commuter was 7 lbs heavier, but then you go on to say that the frame and fork of the Surly are only 2.5 lbs heavier, so doesn't that mean if a Surly build is 7 lbs heavier than your A commuter, that they aren't identical on everything besides the frame and fork?

takenreasy

I have a couple of surly bikes including a Cross Check. I like them because they are steel and accept huge tire widths. Most of my miles are commuting. So, I like comfort and the ability to carry all of my stuff to and fro. I also have a much sportier bike and without all of the excess weight I’m still not really any faster. I wouldn’t give up a great bike nor get another one to go faster. Especially to keep up with other riders. If becoming faster is important, then train harder on your Surly and keep up with the other riders on that. A good rider can dust a “racer” with a LHT if that’s what they’re into.

grolby

Please explain? In general, the lighter gauge tubes of a lighter bike tend to ride better over rough surfaces, not worse. They deflect more. Of course there are things like sprung saddles or suspension that might increase comfort at the expense of weight, are those the sort of thing you're referring to?

GovernorSilver

I'm wondering about this too.

Everyone who tells me I should get a lighter bike for commuting also prefers to not use a rack w/panniers.

kickstart

Weight in of its self will have a minor shock and vibration dampening effect, so will the longer wheel base of cruisers, roadsters, long tails. Larger diameter and fatter wheels roll smoother over rough surfaces. Materials such as "gas pipe" steel transmit less shock and vibration than others. Fat padded grips, sprung seats, shock absorbing seat posts and stems, and suspension all insulate the rider from shock and vibration.
All of these things add weight and comfort.

My traditional steel Gazelle rides like a Rolls Royce but it weighs 60 lbs with everything I have on it and carry. Gazelle also makes a modernized carbon fiber version that weighs half as much, so yes, weight isn't the only factor, but its an unavoidable factor. On the same token, no 16 lb road bike can possibly offer the same quality of ride comfort.

Lightweight road bikes will never be plush load carriers, and heavyweight utility bikes will never be fast and responsive, anybody who claims otherwise it trying to sell a bill of goods.

kickstart

Some people fit their desires to their bike, some people fit their bike to their desires. The trick is for one to figure out which works best for themselves.

GovernorSilver

I'm thinking the solution for me is something in the middle between the two extremes (carbon racer vs. steel tourer). Like maybe an aluminum gravel/endurance road bike.

spare_wheel

my bad. i should have said similarly. it's virtually impossible to configure a bike identically to a cc because the build depends on qpb oem parts from asia.

ThermionicScott 

If you don't need the fenders/rack/panniers for every day of commuting, it's nice having a light and fast whip in the stable.

snow_echo_NY

i agree you don't really need a rack, unless you prefer it. but if you want speedier, i would do without the rack/pannier.

as said previously, having a fast whip in the stable is valuable. i had an aluminum-carbon fork road bike and i have my steel commuter. i'm faster on the steel commuter (i timed it). the weights are comparable (22 lbs for the aluminum road bike and 24 lbs for the surly CC). the aluminum road bike feels faster underfoot b/c it is so light. but charging up hills, the surly CC propels forward in a way the road bike does not (at least perceived by me and also timed). and likewise on downhills but that's expected i suppose.

as others said before, it could all be perceived and enjoyment factor of riding that particular bike. if that's the case, then agree with others to change the bike that you use. you could try changing out the parts of the surly CC as it does seem kind of heavy (the wheels/tires and rack would be the first place i'd look).

a bike is a bike i don't think the surly is slowing you down but it seems to be dampening how you enjoy the rides you're doing as it is right now so...