Stratocaster

Um, yeah. Or you can just read the original post and see that wasn't the point.
Excuse me if you were just being sarcastic.

noodle soup

I concur

That is ridiculous.

garysol1 

Excuse me but I think my reply was pretty on point to the conversation as a whole. Sorry to ruffle your feathers

gregf83 

You're doing it wrong.

badger1

"Do you really like riding a lighter bike?"

Why yes, yes I do. I like my bicycle to be as light as is possible (within my budget) provided it is strong enough to fulfill its intended uses. Why on earth would anyone ride a bicycle heavier than it needs to be?

mpath

+1. I like the feeling of riding (and running) unencumbered with superfluous or unnecessary dead weight; that way it's all up to me and not blaming the equipment or the gear. But I always blame the headwind.

Stratocaster

Well, as was originally mentioned - to ME, a bike with just a little more heft feels better.
I was wondering if anyone felt the same...or not.
I'm just talking about a regular group ride or going out by myself for a workout. I'm not talking about racing in this instance...just riding.

noodle soup

Wow, ultralight race bikes aren't great for JRA.

Who knew?

Stratocaster

IQ not up to snuff? Do you get your ya-ya's from being a tool, or is this just your natural state?

FrenchFit 

Many people feel this way, you just won't find many in this sub-forum. Ride your ride, ignore the roadie tribe.

Pacolyptic

Ahh, "within my budget" - that's the difference between taking the OP's question as some total pie-in-the-sky question (in which case, I'd take one of the weightless light cycles from Tron, though the riding position looks a little uncomfortable) or as a point worth discussing pros/cons.

Once you constraint one of the major interdependent dimensions of the options (ex: weight, cost, durability, comfort, or designed use), then you have to make trade-offs. Count me in the group that finds I drift towards the lighter bikes available to me, but I often wind up preferring one that isn't the lightest.

And in that light, answers like "I want the lightest bike possible that meets all my other demands" don't really offer any insights. E.g. if I was riding a bike and having a fabulous time and someone offered to weld a boat anchor to it, of course I would politely decline.

rmfnla

That's how my commute is, stairs up to my office, but it's not really a problem.

I am more concerned with the feel of the frame rather than the weight, which is why I always seem to come back to steel...

mcours2006

Everything else being equal, of course I'd rather have a lighter bike. Do you prefer a sculpted body with a rippling six pack or an extra 15 pounds of flab in all the wrong places? C'mon!

But some of you noted that the lightest bike isn't your favourite. Of course all else is not equal. I'm the same way. I have a 16lb bike, but I really enjoy riding my 19+ lb steel bike. It's has something the carbon bike will never have--memories of a teenage me riding it.

badger1

Not sure I see your point? To repeat: I don't understand why anyone would ride a bicycle that is heavier than it needs to be -- given its intended use and the cyclist's budget. Simple enough concept. I get that others may prefer, for some reason, a 'heavier' bike that meets those two criteria -- i.e. might choose to ride a 22 pound road bike rather than an 18 pound road bike when they can afford either and when either is fit for that particular cyclist and for the purpose(s) for which he/she will use it. Apparently some here would; I wouldn't.

Stratocaster

Or you could ask: "Would you rather look like Chris Froome or have a "decent" build?"
I guess the original question could be somewhat flawed, because if we're talking about road bikes made of the same material and components, they really shouldn't be THAT much different in weight...maybe 3 lbs max?
But for "similar" bikes of differing materials, I think it could be a valid question.
Regardless - I still think my heavier bike feels "better" (in some respects) than the lighter BMC I tried out. Perhaps after numerous rides I would feel differently. Perhaps time will tell.

noodle soup

I think if you used the BMC for it's intended purpose, your opinion might be different.

Stratocaster

Sure, and if I used a Walmart bike for it's intended purpose, my opinion might be different. But I'm comparing 2 bikes that are fairly similar with many of the same components (Shimano 105).
...It's not like I'm comparing apples and oranges...more like comparing a yellow Granny Smith apple with a Gala apple.

WalksOn2Wheels

Not sure this thread can possibly end well, but...

It always kills me when I get the "Well, it's not as smooth as a nice light road bike, but I sure do get a workout!" line from a guy who pulls a dusty MTB from his garage 3 times a summer. I get more of a workout in an hour on my light bike than he gets in a whole summer.

That said, if the bike is comfortable and rides well, I'm gonna say the weight penalty is not generally a consideration once you're rolling. My fancy bike is 17 pounds with pedals and computer. My CX bike with 32mm slicks is probably 21? I only notice if when I'm picking it up. Average speeds over a 30 or 40 mile loop aren't that different. But then again, I'm slow by BF standards at about 17 or 18 mph avg. 16 if it's windy and I feel like crap. I know everyone here does 100 miles in 4 hours, but I'm not there, yet.

I even recently built a beater. The thing probably weighs 30 pounds. I was shocked when I picked it up. Rolled around the neighborhood and noticed the crappy tires more than the weight. Once rolling it really was fine.

Seattle Forrest

I agree, it's not a problem. But I prefer carrying a lighter bike up the stairs instead of a heavier one.

BillyD

I haven't read through all this so this may be a repeat. One reason that folks prefer lighter bikes is because it's less effort to go speed X. So it's clear to me that if you want to work harder to go speed X, ONE of the ways to work harder would be to ride a heavier bike, for training purposes, let's say. Makes sense to me.

(No, using harder gearing does not eliminate the need or desire for extra weight, you can have both).

Seattle Forrest

Dood, that was a recovery ride, don't make fun of my slowness!

noodle soup

You have missed my point.

You tried a bike that is like a race car, and rode it like a minivan.

cthenn

It should never be about speed, it's all about POWER baby!

Campag4life

Just sharing my experience...I own a 17 lb carbon Roubaix and 23 lb Al Secteur with rear rack.
Roubaix has carbon handlebars, seatpost, crank etc...Secteur is all Al...both bikes have similar Campy wheels. On the flats, there isn't a lot between these bikes in speed. Yes the Roubaix feels racier. The Secteur feels like a Cadillac and once you get it rolling it just motors. There isn't much between the two bikes in average speed on the same route I ride.
Climbing however is another matter. That 6 lbs matters a bit. The Roubaix has a bit stiffer frame as well.
I enjoy both bikes immensely. Slightly different personalities. I believe heavier bikes do have a bit better ride quality, not unlike motorcycles and cars. More mass to damp road shock.
For flat riding, I don't see a big difference in speed. Yes, acceleration is a bit slower with a heavier bike.
I do know however that riding a much heavier bike approaching 30 lbs or so, this really does make a more noticeable difference. 5 lbs I don't think is a big deal unless riding the hills.
Race bikes should be light I believe all said but for recreational riding, a bike with bit of extra weight isn't that big of a deal in my experience and also why I am no weight weenie btw.

ruirui

Stratocaster: i'm the same weight as you @ 150lbs. i'm a weightweenie and previously my 2011 Scott Addict R1 with Sram Red Compact Crank, 11/28t weighs 13.65lbs with farsport 38mm carbon clinchers, pedals, bottle cages, garmin out in front mount and a saddle bag with 1 CO2 inflater + CO2, 1 tire lever and Park's tire patch. but i was never fast enough on the hills and would get dropped like no tomorrow.

that being said.. i recently bought a 2015 BMC TM02 with 105 components (18.3lbs no pedal), stripped it, sold the 105 and converted to SRAM RED 22 group with Zipp SL70 Aero handlebar, Farsports 38mm carbon clinchers with Conti Ultra 700x25c + pedals and a profile design RM1, weight = 16.84lbs.

took her out on the a 29 miles test ride after building her up.. rode the same route as i had always done with my Scott Addict... on this particular stretch of a hill, broke my own PR that i set with my Addict back in 2014 (94 sec) and with BMC TMR02 (92 sec). and i'm not completely dialed in/ fitted in with her just yet.

so in short.. i've been to the dark side of weightweenie.. i love it, my wallet hates it.. but in the end it's all about the motor. i ride with guys that have 18+ lbs bikes and still drops me on climbs like nothing. so for me.. i don't mind having the extra weight.. in fact i find a little bit of weight makes the bike easier to ride and maintain momentum on the flats.. hence my Scott Addict is now a 14.65lbs with custom kinlin 22mm alloy clinchers. soon, i'll be adding a custom kinlin 31mm deep alloy clincher to my TMR02... which will only be about 150-200g heavier than now.