livedarklions

My weight story is that I was riding at about 230 pounds (already quite overweight) in the early to mid 2000s, and that was still reasonably enjoyable. When my weight ballooned to 320 pounds, I stopped cycling because it was so unpleasant to be that slow and exhausted by even the slightest climb. I came back to riding about 10 years later AFTER losing about 7-8 bicycles worth of body weight, and have been riding faster and farther than I have ever done in my previous years. Being able to ride on relatively lightweight bikes (1990s steel racers) has been a great benefit of my weight loss, but I certainly didn't lose the weight to ride the bikes. Now I ride the bikes as part of my (so far very successful) efforts to keep the weight off because it's a whole lot more fun than the alternatives.

I suspect we all have mixed motives for almost anything we do as regards to weight. I'd even go so far as to suggest that OP has found a rather ingenious way to motivate himself to lose weight and maintain a lower body weight. I don't like the poll questions, but the discussion of how our body weights and bike weights relate is interesting. Like most good discussions, it's broadened a bit from the OP, the poll questions won't.

TL/DR: Good thread, lousy poll.

seypat

I think the main problem with the poll is the last choice. It implies that you can't enjoy cycling without doing weight weenieing on yourself or the bike. Maybe there should be more behind.

I have to get this off my chest. The real problem I have with the poll/thread is the OP starts up a thread/poll just so he can add an idiotic phrase to the model of the bike he is pursuing. Now every time he's talking bikes with someone, he will steer the conversation so that he can mention his change to anyone that will listen. That, is the worst thing I have read in the thread so far! Is that supposed to add some street cred? If that's the case, at least spell it "stoopid." Even with that spelling, nobody cares. They might still laugh, but they don't care.

I apologize for the rant.

WhyFi

Yeah, I get that that's his scenario, which is *very* niche, but the poll question seems to be a more general, "after going ww on your bike, did you act upon the realization that you could and should lose weight from your person, as well?" And yes -

...it's silly and obvious that people that care about bike weight also understand the impact of personal weight. As you'd mentioned previously, yeah, some weight weenies trim bike weight as a hobby; while they certainly understand the importance of body weight, acting upon that may or may not fit within the scope of their interest.

Oh goodness, yes. I have worked very closely with a statistician (specializing in market research) for decades. Through listening to kvetching and acting as a sounding board during trouble-shooting sessions, I've gained some practical knowledge of poll construction and sampling - at the very least, I can spot glaring mistakes. Even setting aside the self-selecting, non-representative samples aspect, most polls on BF are pretty bad. This one? A doozy.

livedarklions

TBH, I neither responded to the poll or checked the results. I am interested in people's stories and opinions (the thread), but a poorly worded multiple choice with really unclear overlapping options is of no interest to me. I don't see beating the OP up about it, I think the anecdote actually set up an interesting conversation and I applaud him for that.

WhyFi

Yeah, I had no real interest in the poll and wouldn't have mentioned it, either, but then the poster started throwing results at me as if they meant something.

base2 

They weren't meant as insults. It was finger pointing. There was a genuine miscommunication that has been corrected. I too, didn't appreciate being called a troll & responded in kind.

Honestly, I was taken by surprised by your respones in this thread.
We're all good here.

base2 

It wasn't intended to be a poll. After doing the write up, BF presented a poll option I had never seen before. So, I ticked the box, generated 4 options off the top of my head. It really was that simple. I once generated a poll here & included every possibility in the outcome matrix. I caught flak for that too as some possibilities were impossibly unlikely. Sometime you gotta roll with what you think applies to the widest audience. 🤷‍♂️

As for the "Stoopid Light." Exactly. I thought it was a clever internet banter that made for more interesting reading. Some plot device or vehicle to convey meaning. Simply put, I think I can do better than the bike shop. To set the new highwater mark. The project in that light created unanticipated problems to overcome. My own personal weight being one of them.

In any case, here at Base2 Global Industries the bike is already named "Weenier Bike" on all internal documents. But that sounds silly. Maybe we'll do some market research, polling, etc...& see how "Weiner Bike SL" tracks. 😉

2old

Realized I wasn't a true weight weenie years ago watching a 24 hour race when my friend, racer and bike owner, told me some of the contestants had $600 titanium "V" brakes.

NoWhammies

I focus more on keeping the weight off me and than I do my bike. I think it is much easier, and healthier, to focus on keeping me weight in check as opposed to the weight of my bike.

livedarklions

Ultimately, I think this thread is really about what we do to motivate ourselves to ride and/or lose weight. It's a pretty complicated relationship between the two things and it's interesting how many different ways people approach it.

Also, really funny hen people try to convince everyone they have it right and everybody else has it wrong.

Like I said above, I think OP has figured out a way to use his obsession with a light bike to motivate himself to lose weight, and you have a completely different, basically opposite approach--in effect "screw the bike weight, I'll lose weight". What's really cool is you're both right.

WhyFi

In the last five years, I think I've lost something in the neighborhood of 45lbs. I've always been a relatively strong rider, but increasing the w/kg by decreasing the kgs is huge. In the last couple years, I've also swapped bikes for something lighter and more responsive.

Losing body weight is a long process and so gradual that it's sometimes hard to appreciate. But hoo boy does is show up on the clock. Big time.

Light bikes are fun and the reward can be immediate. It often doesn't show up on the clock, but it's certainly felt and can be a great motivator.

PeteHski

My current road bike isn't particularly light at 8.6 kg and I currently weigh 80 kg. When I'm training specifically for a mountain event I can comfortably get myself down to 75 kg and that definitely makes a significant difference on the long Alpine climbs. On a 7% slope it gives me an extra 0.7 kph at 250W. A lighter climbing bike, say 6.8 kg, would give me another 0.25 kph. So nearly 1 kph higher climbing speed in total.

My "weight-weenie" priority is always to optimise my own body weight and the bike weight is very much secondary. I wouldn't even think about a lighter bike if I was overweight. 1-2 kg of weight saving on the bike is pretty pointless if you can save multiples of that off your own ass. It only starts to make sense when you reach your fighting weight and losing another couple of kg is not really an option. Then you deserve a lighter bike!

livedarklions

That's what's so funny to me about the who's right arguments, motivation really isn't a rational thing, it's emotional. It can be applied to rational goals like maintaining health, but we've got to have emotional reasons for wanting to reach those goals, especially if it takes a lot of effort. The way I ride to keep my weight stable seems crazy to a lot of people, but the enjoyment of the ride is a huge part of how I get myself to make the effort.

devianb

I used to be. Had a spread sheet of weights of every single bike part. I wouldn't install a part unless it weighed less than what it replaced. On one of my bikes my stem was slammed to save 100g. I no longer care about weight, well to a point because I still have to lug my bikes up and down stairs when I use them.

Cougrrcj 

My bikes would be considered heavyweights today - but were relatively light when they were new!

'75 Fuji S-10S was 26.5 pounds when a similar vintage tubular-equipped Schwinn Paramount was 22 pounds.

'86 Miyata 710 was 23.5 pounds (now under 23 pounds with new/lighter rims/tires)

AND one must consider AS-RIDDEN weight! Add water bottle cage and full water bottle/pump/spare tube/toolkit and it adds up quickly. I always carry a spare tube/tire levers/pump at a minimum.

JohnDThompson 

I stopped caring about weight when I had to pay retail price for weight-weenie parts.

PeteHski

That's not much lighter than my full-suspension 130 mm travel carbon trail bike!

seypat

Is that bike hard to ride because it's so heavy? Is it even fun to ride?

wolfchild

Anything between 24 - 32 pounds for a bike isn't heavy. People who consider that to be heavy are just "OCD weight weenie weaklings."

Ironfish653

Are you being serious? Or is this your first "Does Bike Weight Matter?" thread?

seypat

Exactly!

seypat

Sarcastic, of course. The person I quoted, however appears to be talking down to the other person because of the weight of a road bike. Yet his MTB is heavier and is probably a blast to ride. So what? Ride what you want to ride.

masi61

Interesting thread. I just started a thread on the Clydesdale/Athena forum dreading winter and (seemingly) inevitable weight gain. I have a plan to try to not go over 200# this winter. But you are asking about taking steps to reduce bike weight. I used to just ride steel bikes and the only weight trimming I would do was by swapping out heavy clincher wheels for lightweight tubular racing wheels. The difference is clearly noticeable.

But being more experienced with bike builds, I now try to reduce the weight from a lot of components: the seatpost, the saddle, pedals and still rims, hubs, spokes, quick release skewers and even my chain.

Just going to a superlight carbon seatpost, carbon handlebars, Dura Ace 9000 pedals, lightweight racing clinchers that are either tubeless or with latex tubes have all been very effective and change up the ride quality for me significantly. The only caveat is concerns of increased noise and decreased durability. Some of my lightweight choices have to be fully dialed in to be completely strong and quiet. I would rather have a slightly heavier component that is completely silent as opposed to a creaky one. Riding an unnecessarily creaky bike with less than robust parts does not make a person faster in my opinion. Even though the bike is lighter, the distraction factor nibbles away at your focus making you feel off. I would rather feel calm and grounded to the road. Lately I'm not there.

Ironfish653

In fairness, there have been a number of threads lately populated by relentlessly obstinate posters, who are either outliers *cough*'bent*cough*, or totally clueless *cough*moist*cough* and convinced that Everybody Else Is Doing It Wrong, that it's getting hard to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Fair play, then; Carry on.



Ironically, my (favorite) road bike is actually heavier than my MTB, not only that, it's the one that's got a rider weight limit: My old SoftRide Nor'wester. Between the 4130 frame, and the beam and hardware, it's a little on the hefty side; however, she's as fast at mile 105 as it is a mile 5, and climbs like a sonofagun, once you learn how it likes to be ridden. Fantastic piece of kit.

Ironfish653

I'm of a similar chain of thought, although, my 'competitive' weight comes in between 200-210, and with my bike budgets, if it comes to a choice between Light or Strong, I'm taking Strong for my money.
I agree, that good wheels and tires can really wake up a bike, swapping '90s era 32h Sun M13's for even a mid-grade wheel like a 20/24h Shimano WHR500 can liven up the handling and let the frame's ride quality come through.