Here is my contribution to this "weight" thread. This simulator calculates climb times for local NorCal climbs as well as famous Euro climbs such as Alp D' Huez. You input, rider weight, equipment and watts. A reasonable but challenging power to use is 200 watts. I would use the default settings for the frontal area and drag but you can play with rolling resistance and drive train efficiency. I have found the simulator to be very accurate especially for the steeper climbs.

I ran a few cases for Alp D Huez, 8.1 miles, 8% grade, 3410 foot climb assuming a base case of a 150 pound rider at 200 watts with all other settings at default values.

150 pound rider = 1:13:17
151 pound rider = 1:13:41
160 pound rider = 1:17:15
150 pound rider @ 210 watts = 1:10:00

1 pound increased the time 24 seconds
10 pounds increased the time 3:58
10 watts more decreased the time 3:17

And of course .1 pounds would save ~ 2.4 seconds. I will take a hill climb win by 2.4 seconds.

I am assuming rider weight and bike weight are the same. In fact, they are probably not the same in actual human performance. The more weight one carries the higher the internal body temperature for a given power. As temperature increases, power production typically is limited or goes down.

I am an incremental improvement guy who likes to ride nice bicycles. I will not say that lighter is always better but from a pure physics standpoint lighter requires less energy to lift up a hill. YMwillnotV.

Actually, I think tires are the most effective upgrade, and it's easy to do. Don't skimp on tires.

True - but it may be the overwhelming majority of riders are genetically on the slim side, already.

I have a light weight racing bike hanging on the hook in the garage where it spends most of it's life. Light wheels, tires, components etc. It is not much fun to ride for more than about and hour or two. I ride my old steel bike most of the time, it is several pounds heavier. IMHO the best way to go faster and have more fun and even stay in a pack on a group ride is to improve the engine. But improving the engine to the extent needed may not bring you joy either - because the routine is hard and it takes a lot of commitment. You can work yourself up to a fine shape, be pretty fast and a strong climber but unless you stay at it all the time your ability will decline. Find a happy place between fitness and lifestyle and just enjoy the ride.

^^^That should be the mantra of this forum; nay, of all cycledom! Best. Advice. EVER! And succinctly and eloquently stated!

Worth quoting again.

It's a touring bike with very heavy wheels.

Weight will make the biggest difference when climbing and if you do a lot of climbing a few pounds will add to your fatigue by the end of the day.
You can go to a site like analytic cycling and plug in the numbers to see how much difference a given weight makes on a given climb.

At 205#, I am no weight weenie, but I can feel the difference between a 22 pound bike and an 18 pound bike. I can also feel it when I gain 4 or 5 pounds on the body.
On flat ground it doesn't make much difference, except during accelerations. Having climbed with a 55 pound touring bike, I can say on the flats it isn't as dramatic.

Thanks for the info. I think it's the nature of the bike.

My secret is that I got a high energy dog about 1.5 years ago. He needs at least 1 hour of exercise per day and many days we do more than that (walking, running, and off-leash dog parks). I've been riding only 30-40 minutes 2-3 times per week but have lost 20 lbs (i'm 5'9 140lbs) in the last 1.5 years because I'm out there every day with my dog. Oh, and I do not skip the pie.

OMG! 140lbs at 5'9"!!! I waffle between 138~142 at 5'7" and I'm thin--the wife already says hugging me is like hugging an oven rack. I would think you would be really thin. Maybe you should eat an occasional piece of pie. There is such a thing as too thin. When I got down to 136 one time, I felt I was too thin for my height.

Nah, I'm not too thin...
1. I have a lot of legs for my height (i.e. short torso) My cycling inseam is 33.5" and I ride a 56cm frame and the seat is all the way up (granted it's only a 200mm seat post)
2. Swimming and curling (the sweeping can be very strenuous) keep my upper body toned
3. I haven't totally lost the "mid-section" cushioning yet
4. When I was in my 30's, I would get down to 135lbs during the racing season (triathlons/duathlons and some bike races)
5. And as I said, I do *not* skip the pie, or the cake, or the brownies, or the cookies

Ooops, read that last line too fast.

I have to remember when I compare my weight and height to others, that since I lost around 110 lbs(251lbs in Aug 2010), some of my weight I have now is loose skin--so, if I had never been overweight or just slightly overweight during my life and discount my extra skin that I lug around now, I probably, at my present build, would weigh a couple of lbs less than what comes up on the scale.

You know you're a cyclist when you read something like that and think ... cripes ... if I weighed that much, I could really climb!

No way I could though. 140# is not on the radar for this bloke.

If I got down to 190, I could kick some ass.

Unless you are touring a normal road bike weighs much less and is more appropriate. I will never camp and see no need for a touring bike.

My beast is about 40 pounds before adding bags and contents. I hope to do some tent touring before too long. But sometimes I do grocery shopping. I probably carry 40 or 50 pounds of groceries. Very happy to have strong wheels!

I can feel every 5lb loss in bdywt on the hills and acceleration. Gives me the motivation to lose 5 more.