bike weight
02-07-10, 02:06 PM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Quoted: Post(s)
bike weight
Was thinking today about the new light bikes of around 14 lbs and wondered how much did bikes in the 70's or 80's weight? Checked some vintage sites lots of nice pic's but not much else. Was wondering how this related to bike speed, are racers faster today because of improved training or more from improved bikes? I think it's more training first bike second.
02-07-10, 02:09 PM
#2
Senior Member
I've got a 1986 Raleigh Marathon around 25lbs. Seriously, my current 2002 Giant OCR weighs about the same (maybe 2 or 3lbs less).
02-07-10, 02:11 PM
#3
Should Be More Popular
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Malvern, PA (20 miles West of Philly)
Posts: 41,667
Bikes: 1986 Alpine (steel road bike), 2009 Ti Habenero, 2013 Specialized Roubaix
Mentioned: 556 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21202 Post(s)
Liked 7,689 Times
in
3,615 Posts
My vintage 1985 columbus steel bike with full Dura-Ace weighed in (and still weighs in) at 25 pounds. I recall that if you were a super weight weenie you could get safely down to about 22 pounds in the early to mid 80's.
Typical entry level enthusiast bikes in the late 70's and early 80's were somewhere in the 25-27 pound range, if I recall correctly.
As far as why racers are faster now than a generation ago, it probably is mostly due to training, also aerodynamics have come a long way. Lighter weight is farther down the list.
Typical entry level enthusiast bikes in the late 70's and early 80's were somewhere in the 25-27 pound range, if I recall correctly.
As far as why racers are faster now than a generation ago, it probably is mostly due to training, also aerodynamics have come a long way. Lighter weight is farther down the list.
02-07-10, 02:28 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 9,458
Bikes: Something Canadian, something Italian, something American, and something German
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 15 Times
in
9 Posts
My 83 Lotus with Deep Vs and cross tires comes in at 25 pounds. That's with suntour vx components, nothing special.
My boss's SW cotten custom steel frame, with campy nuovo and super record, titanium pedal spindles and tubular rims, weighs a hair under 20. That's a 1977 I believe.
My boss's SW cotten custom steel frame, with campy nuovo and super record, titanium pedal spindles and tubular rims, weighs a hair under 20. That's a 1977 I believe.
02-07-10, 02:38 PM
#5
fuggitivo solitario
My vintage 1985 columbus steel bike with full Dura-Ace weighed in (and still weighs in) at 25 pounds. I recall that if you were a super weight weenie you could get safely down to about 22 pounds in the early to mid 80's.
Typical entry level enthusiast bikes in the late 70's and early 80's were somewhere in the 25-27 pound range, if I recall correctly.
As far as why racers are faster now than a generation ago, it probably is mostly due to training, also aerodynamics have come a long way. Lighter weight is farther down the list.
Typical entry level enthusiast bikes in the late 70's and early 80's were somewhere in the 25-27 pound range, if I recall correctly.
As far as why racers are faster now than a generation ago, it probably is mostly due to training, also aerodynamics have come a long way. Lighter weight is farther down the list.
and the invention and popularization of this for everyone
02-07-10, 02:44 PM
#6
Should Be More Popular
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Malvern, PA (20 miles West of Philly)
Posts: 41,667
Bikes: 1986 Alpine (steel road bike), 2009 Ti Habenero, 2013 Specialized Roubaix
Mentioned: 556 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 21202 Post(s)
Liked 7,689 Times
in
3,615 Posts
^^ I will concede the first point, getting a higher hematocrit (via sleeping in an oxygen tent, training at altitude, or by doping) can make a difference.
However, I don't think that clipless pedals have made any significant improvement in performance over clips/straps. They are better, yes, and more convenient, but I doubt if they affect speed/performance.
However, I don't think that clipless pedals have made any significant improvement in performance over clips/straps. They are better, yes, and more convenient, but I doubt if they affect speed/performance.
02-07-10, 02:52 PM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Posts: 5,750
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1730 Post(s)
Liked 1,564 Times
in
904 Posts
My 1973 Raleigh Professional was supposed to weigh 23 pounds, which was considered somewhat heavy for a bike of that quality at that time. One reason was the fork, which weighed almost as much as the frame. At the time, the lightest pro quality bikes could get well under 20 pounds. Some of the components available at the time were very light. The Huret Jubilee and Campagnolo Super Record rear derailleurs were lighter than anything made today, but indexed shifting adds weight. It was possible to build pretty light bikes, but they would be nowhere near as stiff and efficient as today's bikes. But training methods have improved far more than bikes, as well pros today train much more specifically for certain events
02-07-10, 03:23 PM
#9
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,541
Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1053 Post(s)
Liked 1,890 Times
in
1,295 Posts
My vintage 1985 columbus steel bike with full Dura-Ace weighed in (and still weighs in) at 25 pounds. I recall that if you were a super weight weenie you could get safely down to about 22 pounds in the early to mid 80's.
Typical entry level enthusiast bikes in the late 70's and early 80's were somewhere in the 25-27 pound range, if I recall correctly.
As far as why racers are faster now than a generation ago, it probably is mostly due to training, also aerodynamics have come a long way. Lighter weight is farther down the list.
Typical entry level enthusiast bikes in the late 70's and early 80's were somewhere in the 25-27 pound range, if I recall correctly.
As far as why racers are faster now than a generation ago, it probably is mostly due to training, also aerodynamics have come a long way. Lighter weight is farther down the list.
Todays racers are faster for several reasons, weight being one on climbs. Training today is more scientific and based upon lots of personal data and experiences. 10 or 11 gear cassettes as opposed to 6 or 7 speed freewheels allow for more even and smooth cadences, which adds up over long rides. Clipless pedals are a big advantage over toe clips. Aerodynamics have done a lot in terms of riders position, frames, and wheels.
02-07-10, 03:32 PM
#10
Blast from the Past
Who are we talking about as faster? Pros? Your average 4? Everybody keeps telling me this but I really don't see a big difference, started racing in 1987. 40K national record is from what 1990? If anything should have fallen it would be that one.
Back to the OP, I still have a Zinn Morgul-Bismark from I think 1989. Typical lugged steel bike of the era. 23 lbs with Look pedals, 8 speed Ultegra.
Back to the OP, I still have a Zinn Morgul-Bismark from I think 1989. Typical lugged steel bike of the era. 23 lbs with Look pedals, 8 speed Ultegra.
02-07-10, 03:34 PM
#11
Blast from the Past
My 1973 Raleigh Professional was supposed to weigh 23 pounds, which was considered somewhat heavy for a bike of that quality at that time. One reason was the fork, which weighed almost as much as the frame. At the time, the lightest pro quality bikes could get well under 20 pounds. Some of the components available at the time were very light. The Huret Jubilee and Campagnolo Super Record rear derailleurs were lighter than anything made today, but indexed shifting adds weight. It was possible to build pretty light bikes, but they would be nowhere near as stiff and efficient as today's bikes. But training methods have improved far more than bikes, as well pros today train much more specifically for certain events
Clipless pedals, and perhaps more importantly the stiffer shoes that came with them were huge!
02-07-10, 09:36 PM
#13
juneeaa memba!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: boogled up in...Idaho!
Posts: 5,632
Bikes: Crap. The box is not big enough...
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I have an 85 Pinarello Record (SL) hotrodded with every OMAS bit that I could find. It weighs just a little under 19 LB, without pedals.
