Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

Am I too fat for an aluminum Bike ?

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

Am I too fat for an aluminum Bike ?

Old 11-27-17, 07:47 PM
  #1  
GoProTrek
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
GoProTrek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Boonville Indiana
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Am I too fat for an aluminum Bike ?

Hi, I am 53 and 6'-1 at 320 lbs, I wanna start riding again and want a Trek bike. i have a budget of 750 bucks but bike descriptions on Treks site say nothing about Maximum weights....just curious, the guy at the bike shop said he been there 3 years and never heard anything about weight limits. just worried about crushing an aluminum frame. Thanks
GoProTrek is offline  
Old 11-27-17, 07:58 PM
  #2  
DrIsotope
Non omnino gravis
 
DrIsotope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: SoCal, USA!
Posts: 8,553

Bikes: Nekobasu, Pandicorn, Lakitu

Mentioned: 119 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4898 Post(s)
Liked 1,686 Times in 942 Posts
The frame won't be an issue, but the wheels might be. You're going to want 32-36 spokes.
__________________
DrIsotope is offline  
Old 11-27-17, 08:04 PM
  #3  
Lazyass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 8,322

Bikes: Vintage steel, aluminum, modern carbon disc, single speed, MTB's, the works

Mentioned: 60 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2006 Post(s)
Liked 79 Times in 48 Posts
Trek does show the maximum weight limits on their website. You have to scroll down the page right below the components list.
Lazyass is offline  
Old 11-27-17, 11:34 PM
  #4  
gravelfan
Member
 
gravelfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: Central Valley of California
Posts: 28

Bikes: Two Independent Fabications, a Niner, and a TRek

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Part of the reason people trash wheels is how they ride. I rarely damage wheels at 6-6 and 260 (a former life as a defensive end in college). I have been in pacelines where lighter riders don't lift off the saddle over ruts and have bent rims where heavier riders who unweight their bike and spread the weight over both wheels or avoid the rut completely have little or no damage to the same wheels.
gravelfan is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 01:14 AM
  #5  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 23,570

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, an orange one and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 119 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3887 Post(s)
Liked 1,319 Times in 817 Posts
Originally Posted by Lazyass View Post
Trek does show the maximum weight limits on their website. You have to scroll down the page right below the components list.
Trek shows the maximum weight limits on some of their bikes. What I find curious about the limits, however, is that they are the same for the lower end aluminum bikes as they are for their higher end carbon bikes. The …monda S5 carbon bike has exactly the same limit as the …monda ALR aluminum bike. It's also the same limit as the far more expensive and much lighter Madone 9.9 bike. Something doesn't add up here.

On the other hand, they don't list weight limits on hybrids

__________________
Stuart Black
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Days of Wineless Roads. Bed and Breakfasting along the KATY
Twisting Down the Alley. Misadventures in tornado alley.
cyccommute is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 04:58 AM
  #6  
exmechanic89
Senior Member
 
exmechanic89's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Richmond VA area
Posts: 2,713

Bikes: '00 Koga Miyata Full Pro Oval Road bike.

Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 475 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Originally Posted by gravelfan View Post
Part of the reason people trash wheels is how they ride. I rarely damage wheels at 6-6 and 260 (a former life as a defensive end in college). I have been in pacelines where lighter riders don't lift off the saddle over ruts and have bent rims where heavier riders who unweight their bike and spread the weight over both wheels or avoid the rut completely have little or no damage to the same wheels.
This is very true. Even as a light rider I lift off the saddle on road imperfections, its much easier on the wheels. Probably much easier on the entire bike actually.
exmechanic89 is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 06:08 AM
  #7  
xaosbp
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Michigan
Posts: 15

Bikes: Trek Shift 3

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I suppose it depends on the bike, but honestly I think you'll be fine. When I started I was 6 ft 330lbs. I had (and still have) a Trek Shift 3 and I've never had one issue. I've had it since May of last year and done about 1500 miles total on that one and yet to have one mechanical failure, no flats, no damaged spokes or an untrue wheel. You'll be fine. I think a lot of the "limits" are well below the actual just from legal teams that want to play it safe, which is fair, but don't let it stop you. You won't damage the frame and if your bike has the right wheel stock, you won't need anything custom either.
xaosbp is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 06:43 AM
  #8  
Retro Grouch 
Senior Member
 
Retro Grouch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: St Peters, Missouri
Posts: 30,022

Bikes: Catrike 559 I own some others but they don't get ridden very much.

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1498 Post(s)
Liked 451 Times in 267 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute View Post
Trek shows the maximum weight limits on some of their bikes. What I find curious about the limits, however, is that they are the same for the lower end aluminum bikes as they are for their higher end carbon bikes. The …monda S5 carbon bike has exactly the same limit as the …monda ALR aluminum bike. It's also the same limit as the far more expensive and much lighter Madone 9.9 bike. Something doesn't add up here.

On the other hand, they don't list weight limits on hybrids

An interesting point.

Do they design the bike and then test it afterward to determine the maximum weight capacity. Or do they decide on a weight capacity and then design the bike to meet it.
__________________
My greatest fear is all of my kids standing around my coffin and talking about "how sensible" dad was.
Retro Grouch is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 06:56 AM
  #9  
qcpmsame 
Semper Fi
 
qcpmsame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Barrineau Park, Florida
Posts: 12,773

Bikes: 1980 Medici Pro Strada, 1984 Tommasini Prestige, 2012 Cannondale CAAD 10 Ultegra

Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1126 Post(s)
Liked 180 Times in 143 Posts
Originally Posted by Lazyass View Post
Trek does show the maximum weight limits on their website. You have to scroll down the page right below the components list.
Originally Posted by cyccommute View Post
Trek shows the maximum weight limits on some of their bikes. What I find curious about the limits, however, is that they are the same for the lower end aluminum bikes as they are for their higher end carbon bikes. The …monda S5 carbon bike has exactly the same limit as the …monda ALR aluminum bike. It's also the same limit as the far more expensive and much lighter Madone 9.9 bike. Something doesn't add up here.

On the other hand, they don't list weight limits on hybrids

@DrIsotope siad it in the first reply, "The frame won't be an issue, but the wheels might be. You're going to want 32-36 spokes."
__________________

Are their wheels sets the same ones between the two? The wheels can be the limiting factor for rider weight. I have no idea about what wheels are on Treks, Bontrager I would guess. If Trek lists weight limits for bare frames, then you have a good comparison point. the OP could just upgrade to some 36H hubs and rims to meet his needs.

Frame weight is a factor of several different variables, fiber strength, lay up and resin all can make a CF frame much more sturdy and able to handle loads, yet remain light. Aluminum varies in its alloys used and in its internal formation (hydroforming for butting purposes,) also. The trend towads lower spoke counts for wheels is a big part of the manufacturers setting weight limits on bicycles.

Bill
__________________
Semper Fi, USMC, 1975-1977

I Can Do All Things Through Him, Who Gives Me Strength. Philippians 4:13



Last edited by qcpmsame; 11-28-17 at 07:06 AM.
qcpmsame is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 07:08 AM
  #10  
shelbyfv
Senior Member
 
shelbyfv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 7,825
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2046 Post(s)
Liked 1,757 Times in 952 Posts
Yes, I think there is a good chance that mfgs figure wheels as the weakest part when they set weight limits. I can't recall seeing reports of overweight folks actually breaking frames, usually it's wheels. The Clyde section is a good and friendly resource for all things "biking while XL"
shelbyfv is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 07:12 AM
  #11  
1989Pre
Standard Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Brunswick, Maine
Posts: 2,812

Bikes: 1948 P. Barnard & Son, 1962 Rudge Sports, 1963 Freddie Grubb Routier, 1980 Manufrance Hirondelle, 1983 F. Moser Sprint, 1989 Raleigh Technium Pre, 2001 Raleigh M80

Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 718 Post(s)
Liked 15 Times in 12 Posts
Yes. You need to bring your weight to 250lbs to ride aluminum. Do this and award yourself with a nice, light bicycle.
1989Pre is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 07:18 AM
  #12  
qcpmsame 
Semper Fi
 
qcpmsame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Barrineau Park, Florida
Posts: 12,773

Bikes: 1980 Medici Pro Strada, 1984 Tommasini Prestige, 2012 Cannondale CAAD 10 Ultegra

Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1126 Post(s)
Liked 180 Times in 143 Posts
Originally Posted by shelbyfv View Post
Yes, I think there is a good chance that mfgs figure wheels as the weakest part when they set weight limits. I can't recall seeing reports of overweight folks actually breaking frames, usually it's wheels. The Clyde section is a good and friendly resource for all things "biking while XL"
Agreed, and the wheel builders all use a error factor in their computations for wheel weight limits. No idea what % they use, in construction we usually had a minimum 50% added to weight limits on lifts and crane work. But if the Navy Crane Safety officer was on board the base, it went way up so we didn't get shut down.

When I purchased my CAAD10 4, in 2012, the Fulcrum Racing7 wheel set had the limiting factor for rider weight. By rights, I should have skipped buying it since at that time I was 290 lbs. It never gave me a worry, and now its a moot point since shedding over 100lbs.
qcpmsame is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 09:24 AM
  #13  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 23,570

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, an orange one and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 119 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3887 Post(s)
Liked 1,319 Times in 817 Posts
Originally Posted by Retro Grouch View Post
An interesting point.

Do they design the bike and then test it afterward to determine the maximum weight capacity. Or do they decide on a weight capacity and then design the bike to meet it.
Alternatively, do they design the bike and then a corporate lawyer comes along and tells them what the weight capacity can be so that they have sufficient CYA coverage?

I suspect that it's the latter.
__________________
Stuart Black
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Days of Wineless Roads. Bed and Breakfasting along the KATY
Twisting Down the Alley. Misadventures in tornado alley.
cyccommute is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 09:40 AM
  #14  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 23,570

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, an orange one and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 119 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3887 Post(s)
Liked 1,319 Times in 817 Posts
Originally Posted by qcpmsame View Post
@DrIsotope siad it in the first reply, "The frame won't be an issue, but the wheels might be. You're going to want 32-36 spokes."
__________________

Are their wheels sets the same ones between the two? The wheels can be the limiting factor for rider weight. I have no idea about what wheels are on Treks, Bontrager I would guess. If Trek lists weight limits for bare frames, then you have a good comparison point. the OP could just upgrade to some 36H hubs and rims to meet his needs.

Frame weight is a factor of several different variables, fiber strength, lay up and resin all can make a CF frame much more sturdy and able to handle loads, yet remain light. Aluminum varies in its alloys used and in its internal formation (hydroforming for butting purposes,) also. The trend towads lower spoke counts for wheels is a big part of the manufacturers setting weight limits on bicycles.

Bill
While the wheels might be the limiting factor on how much the bikes can carry, that's not the point of my post. The weight limit for all of Trek's road bikes is the same from top of the range to the bottom. That covers a very wide range of wheels and frame materials. Each bike should have a separate weight carrying ability based on its construction and materials but they just use a blanket number which says to me that it's just a CYA policy and has little to no basis in fact.

On the other hand, GoProTrek's budget doesn't say carbon or even aluminum road bike. His budget says hybrid and there is no weight limit listed for those. I'm not saying that there isn't a weight limit for hybrids, only that Trek doesn't list one.

GoProTrek's weight is probably going to push the machine built wheels to the limit and he will likely experience some spoke failures but that bridge can be crossed when he comes to it.
__________________
Stuart Black
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Days of Wineless Roads. Bed and Breakfasting along the KATY
Twisting Down the Alley. Misadventures in tornado alley.
cyccommute is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 01:14 PM
  #15  
Homebrew01
Super Moderator
 
Homebrew01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ffld Cnty Connecticut
Posts: 21,611

Bikes: Old Steelies I made, Old Cannondales

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1038 Post(s)
Liked 435 Times in 317 Posts
Originally Posted by GoProTrek View Post
Hi, I am 53 and 6'-1 at 320 lbs, I wanna start riding again and want a Trek bike. i have a budget of 750 bucks but bike descriptions on Treks site say nothing about Maximum weights....just curious, the guy at the bike shop said he been there 3 years and never heard anything about weight limits. just worried about crushing an aluminum frame. Thanks
You may want to read some of the posts in this forum, specifically for larger riders.

https://www.bikeforums.net/clydesdal...-200-lb-91-kg/
__________________
Bikes: Old steel race bikes, old Cannondale race bikes, less old Cannondale race bike, crappy old mtn bike.

FYI: https://www.bikeforums.net/forum-sugg...ad-please.html
Homebrew01 is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 01:21 PM
  #16  
John_V 
Senior Member
 
John_V's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 5,582

Bikes: 2017 Colnago C-RS, 2012 Colnago Ace, 2010 Giant Cypress hybrid

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 404 Post(s)
Liked 116 Times in 82 Posts
Trek and other hybrids usually come with sturdy wheels that have a high spoke count. I don't think the OP will have a problem with buying the bike he wants.
__________________
HCFR Cycling Team
Ride Safe ... Ride Hard ... Ride Daily

2017 Colnago C-RS
2012 Colnago Ace
2010 Giant Cypress
John_V is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 02:13 PM
  #17  
tyrion
Senior Member
 
tyrion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 3,224

Bikes: Breezer Radar

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1716 Post(s)
Liked 987 Times in 466 Posts
Originally Posted by Retro Grouch View Post
An interesting point.

Do they design the bike and then test it afterward to determine the maximum weight capacity. Or do they decide on a weight capacity and then design the bike to meet it.
I bet they take all their stress test data and plug into a formula to come up with a conservative weight limit value. If marketing tells engineering that value is too low then the engineers would know how to tweak the design to get numbers marketing wants.
tyrion is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 02:31 PM
  #18  
SethAZ 
Senior Member
 
SethAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,394

Bikes: 2018 Lynskey R260, 2005 Diamondback 29er, 2003 Trek 2300

Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 564 Post(s)
Liked 328 Times in 181 Posts
It's just my opinion, but I do think the OP would be ill advised to get a road bike at this stage. A really heavy rider puts massive stresses on a bike, and not just the wheels, though that's the part that usually breaks first. I think he'd be well advised to go with something like a hardtail 29er mountain bike with some 35mm slick road/commuter tires on it. At the very least a decent hybrid would probably be a reasonable choice.

I don't think that the margin of safety he ought to be concerned about is whether or not he'll probably break the bike today or not. These bikes are engineered with a certain margin of safety that assumes a much, much lighter rider, which means at 320lbs he's probably already well into the designer's margin of safety, if not already beyond it. Will it break today? Probably not. Is "probably not" really good enough? It's always made me nervous as hell.

Btw, I rode a mountain bike all the way from 350lbs down to 275 or so and only then bought a road bike (the one I'd had when I was young was long gone by then), and I always still felt kind of nervous on it, and actually did break the original rear wheel that it came with. I didn't just break a spoke - I literally tore the spoke through the aluminum flange of the hub. And that was just riding over a railroad track without unweighting as I hit it. Fortunately I never had anything else fail on me like that, but bombing down descents at 40-50mph as a superclyde and realizing your bike was probably designed to be ridden by someone over 100lbs lighter can make for some serious reflection. "What if?"

Anyhow, everyone has an opinion, and that's mine, as someone who has ridden thousands of miles on several different bikes at weights both over and under the OP's.
SethAZ is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 02:47 PM
  #19  
Doctor Morbius
Interocitor Command
 
Doctor Morbius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: The adult video section
Posts: 3,378

Bikes: 3 Road Bikes, 2 Hybrids

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 595 Post(s)
Liked 60 Times in 36 Posts
I had an aluminum road frame crack on me just prior to hitting 1,800 miles and I weigh 240. It was a 2004 Specialized Sequoia Elite. You'd think with a name like Sequoia it could stand up to years of abuse. However, I never abused it.
Doctor Morbius is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 04:22 PM
  #20  
SethAZ 
Senior Member
 
SethAZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,394

Bikes: 2018 Lynskey R260, 2005 Diamondback 29er, 2003 Trek 2300

Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 564 Post(s)
Liked 328 Times in 181 Posts
At the time this was fun, but afterwards I was terrified by the "what if" possibilities: I did a 40something mile round trip ride up Mt. Lemmon near Tucson. So that's like 20 miles up, with something like 5500 feet of elevation. That was a pretty hard slog for me at my 275 lbs or so. Then, of course, I got to speed like 45 minutes just bombing down that mountain. Nothing serious happened, but afterwards I was thinking about it: were those brakes really up to it? What abuse does a 275-lb guy put on 2003-era Ultegra 6500 hardware that already has thousands of miles on it by 2013? All it would have taken was for the front brakes to fail somehow while I was bombing down that winding road at 40+mph and I might not be here typing this right now.

Now, nothing happened. And I have no idea how close that equipment came to actually failing, and there's no way I'll ever know. But I can say, with confidence, that at 275 lbs I was much closer to that line than a 175 lb rider would have been. At 320 lbs it would just be that much worse. Anyhow, I posted my $.02 earlier, and just gave you another $.02. Now you've got $.04.
SethAZ is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 04:30 PM
  #21  
HTupolev
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,618
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1633 Post(s)
Liked 678 Times in 344 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute View Post
Something doesn't add up here.
Seems straightforward to me.

Design all your road frames according to similar sets of durability requirements, the higher-end bikes end up lighter, and pick a single boilerplate max weight figure that's simple for sales and leaves you with decent liability clearance.
HTupolev is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 04:36 PM
  #22  
fietsbob
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 43,599

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 197 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7607 Post(s)
Liked 1,301 Times in 816 Posts
Originally Posted by GoProTrek View Post
Hi, I am 53 and 6'-1 at 320 lbs, I wanna start riding again and want a Trek bike. i have a budget of 750 bucks but bike descriptions on Treks site say nothing about Maximum weights....just curious, the guy at the bike shop said he been there 3 years and never heard anything about weight limits. just worried about crushing an aluminum frame. Thanks


I'd talk to your Trek dealer , if I were in your situation.
fietsbob is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 05:54 PM
  #23  
qcpmsame 
Semper Fi
 
qcpmsame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Barrineau Park, Florida
Posts: 12,773

Bikes: 1980 Medici Pro Strada, 1984 Tommasini Prestige, 2012 Cannondale CAAD 10 Ultegra

Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1126 Post(s)
Liked 180 Times in 143 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute View Post
While the wheels might be the limiting factor on how much the bikes can carry, that's not the point of my post. The weight limit for all of Trek's road bikes is the same from top of the range to the bottom. That covers a very wide range of wheels and frame materials. Each bike should have a separate weight carrying ability based on its construction and materials but they just use a blanket number which says to me that it's just a CYA policy and has little to no basis in fact.

On the other hand, GoProTrek's budget doesn't say carbon or even aluminum road bike. His budget says hybrid and there is no weight limit listed for those. I'm not saying that there isn't a weight limit for hybrids, only that Trek doesn't list one.

GoProTrek's weight is probably going to push the machine built wheels to the limit and he will likely experience some spoke failures but that bridge can be crossed when he comes to it.
I wasnít referring to your post at all, just a general comment to the OP is all that was intended. No question about possibly being just a blanket weight limit disclaimer by Trek. Companies get sued almost daily for trivial omissions that are clerical but the civil law system has made lawsuits a growth industrry at a cost to all of us.

My CAAD 10 had a weight limit established by the Fulcrum wheel set as all CAAD 10 frames for 2012 were identical in their construction. No idea about Treks since I donít own one.

Bill
__________________
Semper Fi, USMC, 1975-1977

I Can Do All Things Through Him, Who Gives Me Strength. Philippians 4:13


qcpmsame is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 06:10 PM
  #24  
Abe_Froman
Senior Member
 
Abe_Froman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 2,566

Bikes: Marin Four Corners, 1960's Schwinn Racer in middle of restoration, mid 70s Motobecane Grand Touring, various other heaps.

Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9346 Post(s)
Liked 55 Times in 49 Posts
Originally Posted by 1989Pre View Post
Yes. You need to bring your weight to 250lbs to ride aluminum. Do this and award yourself with a nice, light bicycle.
Now that's just ridiculous. Obviously as one continues to lose weight, they need to trade up to heavier and heavier bikes to offset the weight loss.

This is what you buy when you reach your goal weight:

Abe_Froman is offline  
Old 11-28-17, 06:32 PM
  #25  
buffalo4life
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: buffalo
Posts: 74

Bikes: 86 Trek 330 fixie, 2011 Trek 1.1, POS mb

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 2 Posts
I would ride any material of bike at your weight providing your bike is in good condition, which of course it would be if it was new from a shop.
buffalo4life is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.