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

Pound for pound what makes more of a difference?

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!

Pound for pound what makes more of a difference?

Old 08-16-12, 04:34 PM
  #1  
Wait For Me
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 129
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Pound for pound what makes more of a difference?

For all of us that are more then 10% body fat. What makes more of a noticeable difference? Shaving 5lbs of the bike or 5lbs off the rider?
Wait For Me is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 04:44 PM
  #2  
lsberrios1 
Senior Member
 
lsberrios1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Atlanta GA
Posts: 2,844

Bikes: '13 Spech Roubaix SL4 Expert

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 297 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Im gonna take an uneducated guess...From what ive seen apparently it doesnt make much of a difference to shed weight on the bike if you are overweight. So I say rider first bike second. If I have to guess what comes after the rider it would be wheels. I know in motorcycling dropping 3 pounds of unsprung weight in your wheels will make a huge difference in acceleration, turn in and braking. Not really sure if it is the same on a bicycle.
__________________
Cat 6 going on PRO....
lsberrios1 is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 05:01 PM
  #3  
Garfield Cat
Senior Member
 
Garfield Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 6,829

Bikes: Cervelo Prodigy

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 338 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Wait For Me View Post
For all of us that are more then 10% body fat. What makes more of a noticeable difference? Shaving 5lbs of the bike or 5lbs off the rider?
I would imagine shaving off your own weight makes the difference at all kinds of performances, not just the bike.
Garfield Cat is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 05:03 PM
  #4  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 21,283

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

Mentioned: 91 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2415 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 79 Times in 55 Posts
Originally Posted by Wait For Me View Post
For all of us that are more then 10% body fat. What makes more of a noticeable difference? Shaving 5lbs of the bike or 5lbs off the rider?
Depends. 5 lbs off the wheels would make a huge difference and would probably be more important than body weight.
__________________
Stuart Black
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.
An Good Ol' Fashion Appalachian Butt Whoopin'.
cyccommute is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 05:26 PM
  #5  
njkayaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 11,001
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1648 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute View Post
Depends. 5 lbs off the wheels would make a huge difference and would probably be more important than body weight.
The issue of "rotating weight" is greatly exaggerated. Anyway, it would be quite hard to be able to remove 5 lbs off of the wheel.
njkayaker is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 05:28 PM
  #6  
njkayaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 11,001
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1648 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Garfield Cat View Post
I would imagine shaving off your own weight makes the difference at all kinds of performances, not just the bike.
+1.

Unless one is talking about surgery, removing 5 lbs from the rider will usually be associated with improved conditioning.
njkayaker is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 06:15 PM
  #7  
frantik
Chainstay Brake Mafia
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: California
Posts: 6,028
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
when i carry my bike up and down stairs, 5 lbs off the bike is definitely appreciated no matter my body weight
frantik is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 07:41 PM
  #8  
Aeolis
Senior Member
 
Aeolis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Southington, CT
Posts: 429
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Well my bike weighs 18 pounds and I weigh 160. I'd rather take 5 off the bike.
Aeolis is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 08:00 PM
  #9  
BlazingPedals
Senior Member
 
BlazingPedals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Middle of da Mitten
Posts: 10,917

Bikes: Trek 7500, RANS V-Rex, Optima Baron, Velokraft NoCom, M-5 Carbon Highracer, homebuilt recumbent

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 898 Post(s)
Liked 16 Times in 13 Posts
Losing 5 lbs from your body would result in almost negligible performance gains. Seconds on a long hill climb. Losing 5 lbs from the bike would make it handle noticeably quicker, which would make it less tiring to ride. So I'll vote for the bike.
BlazingPedals is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 08:10 PM
  #10  
rebel1916
Senior Member
 
rebel1916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,011
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
If you are in anyway over weight, concentrate on losing body weight. It will pay all sorts of dividends. Than, when you reach your target weight, reward yourself with a lighter bike. It's a win win. If you also reward yourself with a bottle of singlemalt it's a win win win. I weighed 230 something in late 2005. I weigh 160 something now. My life is better for it.

Last edited by rebel1916; 08-16-12 at 08:31 PM.
rebel1916 is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 08:27 PM
  #11  
bigfred 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NZ
Posts: 3,839

Bikes: More than 1, but, less than S-1

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
"If the ride is over 10% body fat."

The healthier diet and increase in exercise to loose the 5lbs from the rider will hands down result in more improvement than a 5 lb lighter bike.
__________________
Birth Certificate, Passport, Marriage License Driver's License and Residency Permit all say I'm a Fred. I guess there's no denying it.
bigfred is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 08:54 PM
  #12  
iheartbacon
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 456
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by bigfred View Post
"If the ride is over 10% body fat."

The healthier diet and increase in exercise to loose the 5lbs from the rider will hands down result in more improvement than a 5 lb lighter bike.
Unless you happen to ride a sixty pound, single speed, Swiss Army Bike.
iheartbacon is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 10:13 PM
  #13  
mechBgon
Senior Member
 
mechBgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 6,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Having actually done both, it may sound odd but I'd say 5 pounds off the bike. I can be in good training within a ~10-pound range, I don't think my W/kg ratio is necessarily varying that much. But the bike doesn't get more efficient when it's 5 pounds heavier, it's a bike.

The most eye-opening illustration would be to switch my winter training bike from its studded tires and tubes to its road tires and tubes. That's a 3.8 pound loss at the edge of the wheels, and the difference is amazing. I've also tried ditching weight at the base of a specific hillclimb that I do frequently, which resulted in demonstrably better results on Strava. So based on my subjective and objective results, I'd lean towards the bike weight, provided the rider is actually in training. If you're not in training, then sure, the training required to lose 5 pounds is probably going to be a win-win for you.
mechBgon is offline  
Old 08-16-12, 10:38 PM
  #14  
bigfred 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NZ
Posts: 3,839

Bikes: More than 1, but, less than S-1

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by mechBgon View Post
Having actually done both, it may sound odd but I'd say 5 pounds off the bike. I can be in good training within a ~10-pound range, I don't think my W/kg ratio is necessarily varying that much. But the bike doesn't get more efficient when it's 5 pounds heavier, it's a bike.

The most eye-opening illustration would be to switch my winter training bike from its studded tires and tubes to its road tires and tubes. That's a 3.8 pound loss at the edge of the wheels, and the difference is amazing. I've also tried ditching weight at the base of a specific hillclimb that I do frequently, which resulted in demonstrably better results on Strava. So based on my subjective and objective results, I'd lean towards the bike weight, provided the rider is actually in training. If you're not in training, then sure, the training required to lose 5 pounds is probably going to be a win-win for you.
I don't doubt that ditching 5 pounds at the base of a climb would result in an improvement. The question remains, if you could have ditched that weight from "you" instead of the "bike" would it have made more or less of a difference. "That" unfortunately is a hard one to prove either way. I suspect that a "fit" rider of greater than 10% body fat would see less improvement through weight loss than an "unfit" rider with the same body fat.

Loosing 5 lbs from wheels or other rotating mass alone is realatively difficult unless making wholesale changes in the very nature of the type of bicycle, i.e. steel wheeled cruiser to aluminum rimmed road bike. So, at the point one is including the weight loss from static components, frame, brifters, etc. I would contend that while the bike may "feel" different, the actual performance gain wouldn't be any more than when the same weight is lost from the rider.
__________________
Birth Certificate, Passport, Marriage License Driver's License and Residency Permit all say I'm a Fred. I guess there's no denying it.
bigfred is offline  
Old 08-17-12, 04:49 AM
  #15  
Joemess
Space for rent
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: South East
Posts: 278
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Do you really have to ask this?

Take it off of the rider. Not only is that 5 lbs you are no longer carrying up a hill, it f less pounds of strain on your heart and lungs which will allow you to recover better both during and after a ride.
Joemess is offline  
Old 08-17-12, 06:38 AM
  #16  
Garfield Cat
Senior Member
 
Garfield Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Posts: 6,829

Bikes: Cervelo Prodigy

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 338 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
If your bike already weighs 15 lbs, then you might not be able to shave off too much more.

Shaving off 5 lbs from a rider means very little or very much, depending on how the rider takes advantage of that weight loss. On a hot and humid day, a rider can lose a lot of weight. So what.
Garfield Cat is offline  
Old 08-17-12, 08:27 AM
  #17  
njkayaker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 11,001
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1648 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by iheartbacon View Post
Unless you happen to ride a sixty pound, single speed, Swiss Army Bike.
A 55lb bike wouldn't really be measurably faster.

Somebody who could stand to loose 5 extra pounds is likely going to be stronger and in better condition after losing it. The issue of the mere weight is a secondary benefit.
njkayaker is offline  
Old 08-17-12, 08:39 AM
  #18  
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 21,283

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

Mentioned: 91 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2415 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 79 Times in 55 Posts
Originally Posted by njkayaker View Post
The issue of "rotating weight" is greatly exaggerated. Anyway, it would be quite hard to be able to remove 5 lbs off of the wheel.
Not really. Check here for a nice simple explanation. You can test this at home if you like. Put a set of steel rims on your bike and go for a ride. Then put on a set of aluminum rims. The steel rims take much more energy to get moving and keep moving than the aluminum rims.

Edit: I just saw MechbGon's post on winter tires. This is a much easier demonstration to accomplish then a steel vs aluminum wheel comparison. I have a front studded tire and will only use it if I absolutely have to. The damned thing is difficult to get rolling and significantly impacts my commuting times.
__________________
Stuart Black
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.
An Good Ol' Fashion Appalachian Butt Whoopin'.

Last edited by cyccommute; 08-17-12 at 08:42 AM.
cyccommute is offline  
Old 08-17-12, 09:59 AM
  #19  
Keith99
Senior Member
 
Keith99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Makes no difference where weight is lost (save in rotating parts) as far as the weight loss benefits goes.

The question is what else is lost. Or for that matter gained.

If you ride more and lose weight odds are you have lost fat and possibly even gained muscle mass in the legs. If you lose body weight by starving yourself you are going to lose muscle as well as fat . Possible net loss in cycling ability.

If you start with a good bike and try to trim weight you may sacrifice stiffness or other thigns. Possible loss. Start witha crappy bike and replace mild steel with a better material you may lose weight and gain stiffness.
Keith99 is offline  
Old 08-17-12, 10:04 AM
  #20  
StanSeven
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,056

Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 576 Post(s)
Liked 26 Times in 24 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute View Post
Not really. Check here for a nice simple explanation. You can test this at home if you like. Put a set of steel rims on your bike and go for a ride. Then put on a set of aluminum rims. The steel rims take much more energy to get moving and keep moving than the aluminum rims.
Thanks for posting that. It's clear enough even for me to understand
StanSeven is offline  
Old 08-17-12, 10:32 AM
  #21  
JonathanGennick 
Senior Member
 
JonathanGennick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Munising, Michigan, USA
Posts: 3,987

Bikes: Priority 600, Priority Continuum, Devinci Dexter

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
I resent the often less-than-subtle implication that we who are over our target weight somehow are not deserving of a lightweight bike. I happily lose weight from my bike when I can afford to do so. If the OP can afford to drop five pounds from his bike instantly, he should do it. He'll enjoy riding that much more, and he'll lose the body weight in the long run anyway. The right answer then, is to lose weight from both the bike and the body.
JonathanGennick is offline  
Old 08-17-12, 10:45 AM
  #22  
DCB0
Banned.
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 937

Bikes: CCM Torino 76

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute View Post
Not really. Check here for a nice simple explanation. You can test this at home if you like. Put a set of steel rims on your bike and go for a ride. Then put on a set of aluminum rims. The steel rims take much more energy to get moving and keep moving than the aluminum rims.

Edit: I just saw MechbGon's post on winter tires. This is a much easier demonstration to accomplish then a steel vs aluminum wheel comparison. I have a front studded tire and will only use it if I absolutely have to. The damned thing is difficult to get rolling and significantly impacts my commuting times.
You are about 15% correct in that post.

HEavier wheels/tires will impact the effort required for acceleration, but not for cruising at a constant speed. On level ground at constant speed, weight of bike, wheels/tires, and rider, play no role.
The switch from studded tires to street tires may make a big difference, but it is impossible to say if it is from the weight, or from the added rolling resistance of the thicker rubber used to keep the studs in place and not poking the tube, and possibly the extra flex in the rubber caused by the rigid studs hitting the pavement. All of these doubtless play some role in slowing you down, but it is impossible to say how much is caused by the weight.

Last edited by DCB0; 08-17-12 at 11:52 AM. Reason: tie-po's
DCB0 is offline  
Old 08-17-12, 10:48 AM
  #23  
DCB0
Banned.
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 937

Bikes: CCM Torino 76

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by JonathanGennick View Post
I resent the often less-than-subtle implication that we who are over our target weight somehow are not deserving of a lightweight bike. I happily lose weight from my bike when I can afford to do so. If the OP can afford to drop five pounds from his bike instantly, he should do it. He'll enjoy riding that much more, and he'll lose the body weight in the long run anyway. The right answer then, is to lose weight from both the bike and the body.
Don't pile your insecurities on us, man. Nobody said us fatties aren't deserving of a lighter bike, just that there are more useful and sensible ways to get faster than throwing money at a perfectly good bike when the same improvement can be had by skipping a third desert.

When racing as a younger person, I was regularily beaten by much fitter people on much heavier bikes.
DCB0 is offline  
Old 08-17-12, 11:29 AM
  #24  
rebel1916
Senior Member
 
rebel1916's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,011
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by JonathanGennick View Post
I resent the often less-than-subtle implication that we who are over our target weight somehow are not deserving of a lightweight bike. I happily lose weight from my bike when I can afford to do so. If the OP can afford to drop five pounds from his bike instantly, he should do it. He'll enjoy riding that much more, and he'll lose the body weight in the long run anyway. The right answer then, is to lose weight from both the bike and the body.
Somebody call a waaaaaaaaaaaaambulance
rebel1916 is offline  
Old 08-17-12, 11:39 AM
  #25  
JonathanGennick 
Senior Member
 
JonathanGennick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Munising, Michigan, USA
Posts: 3,987

Bikes: Priority 600, Priority Continuum, Devinci Dexter

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by DCB0 View Post
Don't pile your insecurities on us, man. Nobody said us fatties aren't deserving of a lighter bike,
At least a couple of the earlier responses said just that.
JonathanGennick is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.