Funny thing is that I don't see much of a "performance difference" from any of my bikes that I can point to the total weight. Even on long climbing rides the gearing matters more to me than weight. Of course I'm old and slow, LOL! For me the quickest bike is the most comfortable one. Right now that happens to be the heavy steel bike. On rough roads it just keeps me more connected and in the power where as the lighter CF bikes just bounce me around.

The problem is that then the weight of the bike becomes meaningless. There are large variations in everything else you add to the bike - pedals, cages etc.. It's bad enough with saddles even that can have 200g+ (i.e. half pound) variant. Pedals can have more than a qtr pound difference (100g). You see it all the time - people take a light bike and turn it into a porker with accessories. So if we are talking about bike weight, you can't know what the actual bike weighs unless you do it with the "showroom" method. FWIW, that's pretty much what manufacturers do when they mention weight.

Agree.

No, but a lot of people do it once *and* you can do it when you buy the bike. I do, however, frequently change pedals. Changing pedals can be done in well less than a minute.

In general, the weight of a bike is a third in the frame/fork and basic frame components, a third in the wheels an a third in the component group. If a frame weighs (using a good carbon frame) 1200g and you add two heavy water bottle cages, you can easily add 10% to the weight of the frame. The pedals are going to go around 300-450g or about 1/4 the weight of the frame. Just with those two things - pedals and cages, you are going to be near half the weight of the frame. So if they are on the bike, what have you learned about the actual weight of the bike? Pretty much nothing except useless information.


J.

This Spring Captain Fast was trying to sell me his now "obsolete" Team Shy Replica Pinnalized-Specarello.
While extolling all of the various top-end Wiggo-era bits 'n bobs he proudly announced that it weighted a feathery X.xx #'s.

I picked it up before test riding:

B: "It doesn't weigh X.xx #'s."
CF: "Well, that's without this and that and some other stuff on it."
B: "Really? Do you ride it like that?"
CF: "Of course not!"

As noted previously If it's not ride-able it's not a Bicycle, it's a Marketing object.
I'm not interested in marketing, suit yourself.

-Bandera

Well I've said that recently and the drama queens came out in force :lol:

Pedals on, pedals off, doesn't really matter. I think it matters to show people what bikes actually weigh so they don't get caught up in the Internet ever-lightening bike BS. Snap a pic of them on a Park scale, include the size of the bike and bring some realism to the discussion. In general, I mean. That's not a call for this specific thread.

It's just now when I read someone say my bike weighs 15 lbs, I'm thinking prove it.

As I have said before, I use the same pedals, cages, and computer mounts on all my bikes. So the sum of those weights totaled up are my personal adjustment to any bike weight I see advertised. If I see a bike advertised bare of those things at 13.0 lb, then I know (if I could tolerate the stock saddle), that it would weigh 13.80 lb if I were riding it. What I can't know is how much those same things would weigh if chosen differently by any of you. I don't care what your bike weighs when you ride it, only what it would weigh if I were riding it with my stuff attached. So that is why the bare bones weight is more valuable to me. That weight plus my add ons tells me what any bike would weigh in complete, rideable condition if I owned it. And that is all that matters.

Why the fascination with the Park brand balance? You have already mentioned it more than once. They are grossly overpriced at around $60. You can get a Chinese "fish" balance for $5-10 on ebay, delivered, that has a wider range and is just as accurate and more precise than the Park.

http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=489883

Any of you guys use a digital luggage scale like this? $14 at walmart

http://ll-us-i5.wal.co/dfw/dce07b8c-...p-450x450.webp

That's how I weighed my bike. Of course, it has lead to some people doubting my results because I'm not using the Park and/or Feedback sports scale which are the weight weenie standards.

The Park is probably made in the same Chinese factory as everything else :lol:

A weighty distinction...:rolleyes:

-Bandera

Tell them I said it was okay. That should settle it.

When I need to reduce weight on my bike to climb long hills, I always remove my pedals. It helps... a lot.

Digital scales must be very accurate! After all, "there's the weight", in plain digits. Really no debate on what something weighs assuming that something is properly prepared.

My very rough calculations are made with this sagging old thing.

http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u...psfstjp542.jpg

It must be 50 years old (vintage!) and is really only any good for weighing things that weigh more rather than less. In fact, I suspect that it is more accurate for heavier bikes (laden with pedals, fenders, rack, electronics, repair kit, etc) than lighter bikes. I can weigh my bikes with everything attached and then subtract the "excess". This is far easier than removing stuff.

I'm not sure if I spent more than $5-10 at the garage (I mean "estate") sale where I found it. It wasn't expensive and it still reminds me that for 2015, titanium was a most unexpected "material of choice". Haha

I can attest to the importance of doing it this way.

I recently built a bicycle from a custom frame. I had spent a lot of time working with the frame building to keep the weight of the frame down to accomplish a goal I had in mind for the overall weight of the bicycle when complete. That meant I spent a lot of time doing the weight weenie thing looking at the cost and weight of all the components in pretty fine detail. This is really the only way that makes sense because "ready to ride" means very different things to different people and it can have a huge impact on the weight of the bike. The common denominator is before all those user chosen parts go on. Otherwise, it's pretty meaningless. "Ready to Ride" is about as specific as saying "I'll meet you in North America someplace."

J.

So, what does it weigh "complete"? :)

-Bandera

You get it. I get it. So many don't. They regard reporting the weight without the add ons as cheating.

I report weight with rider included because I never ride mine via remote control.

167lbs for my current ride.

That's my walking weight. My riding weight is typically about 18-22 pounds higher. But I find that the extra 18-22 pounds makes me faster. BTW, my driving weight is about 2767 pounds, and it's even faster yet. My 747 flying weight is approximately 800167 pounds, and it's even faster yet again - much faster, in fact, but that might not count, because someone else is doing the actual flying.

Pilot doping!

I am another one who thinks the pedal-less bike weight is BS, kinda like the "mileages" of cars. OK, the sales floor can do it. We expect BS there.

They only weight I care about is the weight I ride. Pedals always. WB cages always (but different numbers depending on bike, time of year and ride). Pump, toolbag and contents. Some bikes a headlight mount, fenders and rack(s). Two bikes a lock.

A compromise that would satisfy me is tho have a standard weight added to the current marketing weight to make it somewhat real. How about 250 grams to cover pedals, WB cages and one or two little items. That gives you a weight at least you could ride the bike around the block. A true weinie could beat it but so what.

Ben

I know I won't change your mind. But try to think of the pedal-less weight as a basic standard. It isn't BS, because nobody is suggesting you can ride the bike that way. They are saying this is the weight before you add on your personal stuff. It isn't fake, because it is very clearly explained exactly what it is and what it isn't. And what is Trek or Spesh supposed to do if they sell the bikes without all that stuff? Make up a weight? They give the weight for the bike the way it is sold. That sure makes a lot of sense to me. It is your job to convert that to the condition when you ride the bike.

So I understand and agree it is useful to know what the bike weighs ready-to-ride. With regard to the compromise, here's a better idea. Stop guessing and just measure the actual weight of your specific, personal add-ons. Weigh all that stuff, and then you will know what your kit of bike add-ons weigh. Then whenever you see a "showroom" bike weight you don't have to point your finger and call BS on it. Instead you can easily convert it to your ready-to-ride weight. And BTW, even with light pedals, the stuff weighs close to a pound.

What does a bottle cage weigh? 25-50 grams (a.k.a 1-2 ounces)? Does anyone actually believe that this amount of weight matters in the slightest?

Yep. When I was building this latest bike and trying for pretty low weight for a steel bike, trying to get to my design goal was challenging. Since I hadn't been so rigorous on weight before, I really started spending a lot of time figuring out what things weighed. The two most frustrating things were trying to figure out what the weight of a frame and fork was on a bike I had without dissembling the thing and finding out how badly component manufacturers lie about the weight of their products. You cannot look at a bike, go and get the manufacturer's spec for the weight of their component and take that as accurate. I've seen variances from the "spec" of 25-50% even from some of the largest suppliers. It's beyond ridiculous.

The only way to understand what the bike weighs and to be able to compare it in any meaningful way is to strip it down and weigh it showroom style.

J.

Maybe I can wrap my mind around the pedal-less weight. Basic Standard. BS. I can get on board with that.

Ben