Is a 38 pound bike better than a 22?
05-28-05, 02:51 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Somerset, KY -- near Lake Cumberland
Posts: 757
Bikes: 1980 Univega; 1985 Ross; 1994 Trek 1400 -- all road bikes
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Is a 38 pound bike better than a 22?
I have a 1985 Ross road bike that's a real tank -- 38 pounds ready to roll. I also have a 1994 aluminum Trek 1400 that weighs in at 22 pounds. My theory is, the heavier bike gives a better workout, especially in my area where the hills are more plentiful than the flats. The heavier bike is also faster on the downhills. I can attain 44 mph on the Ross; 40 with the Trek. Has any other senior cyclist found this to be true?
__________________
"I am a true laborer. I earn that I eat, get that I wear, owe no man hate, envy no man's happiness, glad of other men's good, content with my harm." As You Like It, Act 3, Scene 2. Shakespeare.
"Deep down, I'm pretty superficial." Ava Gardner.
"I am a true laborer. I earn that I eat, get that I wear, owe no man hate, envy no man's happiness, glad of other men's good, content with my harm." As You Like It, Act 3, Scene 2. Shakespeare.
"Deep down, I'm pretty superficial." Ava Gardner.
05-28-05, 07:00 AM
#2
Riding a bitsa
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Albuquerque, NM, USA
Posts: 517
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm not a bicycle expert, but have participated in athletics of various nature for a long time. Training is specific. If your aim is to train to push a heavy bike around, then the Ross is best. However either bike can handle you putting the same wattage into your workouts. Thus, from a pure fitness view, it should make no difference - other than for the same effort, all things being equal, you'll be moving faster on the lighter bike.
05-28-05, 09:47 AM
#3
Humvee of bikes =Worksman
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 5,362
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
6 Posts
Originally Posted by trmcgeehan
I have a 1985 Ross road bike that's a real tank -- 38 pounds ready to roll. I also have a 1994 aluminum Trek 1400 that weighs in at 22 pounds. My theory is, the heavier bike gives a better workout, especially in my area where the hills are more plentiful than the flats. The heavier bike is also faster on the downhills. I can attain 44 mph on the Ross; 40 with the Trek. Has any other senior cyclist found this to be true?
everyman's machine. Both will give a good workout.
05-28-05, 04:36 PM
#4
Time for a change.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: 6 miles inland from the coast of Sussex, in the South East of England
Posts: 19,913
Bikes: Dale MT2000. Bianchi FS920 Kona Explosif. Giant TCR C. Boreas Ignis. Pinarello Fp Uno.
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
4 Posts
Both will give a good workout but the lighter bike will be more enjoyable.
05-28-05, 05:52 PM
#5
Senior Member
It depends on what you're trying to do. If you put the same horsepower engine in two different weight vehicles, the lighter one will move faster.
05-28-05, 06:11 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Southern Maine
Posts: 8,941
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12192 Post(s)
Liked 1,496 Times
in
1,108 Posts
It's all about the fun. Which one do you like better?
