Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Difference between 20 and 16.5 pounds

Search
Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

Difference between 20 and 16.5 pounds

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-24-10 | 02:10 PM
  #51  
lpolliard's Avatar
'09 Synapse Carbon 3
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
From: Mission Viejo, CA

Bikes: '09 Synapse Carbon 3, R5000, R2000

The answer is 3.5 lbs.
lpolliard is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:11 PM
  #52  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by njkayaker
Reduced weight has a small effect on average speed.
The cost of reducing weight starts to increase very quickly (it's a case of diminishing returns). This small effect is worth a lot to racers.

If you ride on the hoods, when not in a pace line, then riding on the drops will have a much, much larger effect on your speed. And riding in the drops is free!

You can get an idea of actual numbers by playing with something like the following.

https://www.noping.net/english/

(Note that the calculators don't take into account the effort that climbing long/steep hills requires.)
It's not just hills that less weight makes faster, it's acceleration to your max 'cruising' speed from a stop. It takes forever for me and my 27 pound bike to reach 20-21 which is how fast I can go in a straight line with a moderate effort, but every time I slow down it takes that much longer to get back to that speed. A lighter bike would probably reach that speed a few seconds shorter.

This is especially relevant in criteriums, especially ones with hills. That, and riding in traffic, or around cities.
baribari is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:13 PM
  #53  
gsteinb's Avatar
out walking the earth
Sheldon Brown Memorial - Titanium
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 21,440
Likes: 752
From: Lake Placid, NY
Originally Posted by joe_5700
Sigh. I take it you are not much of a gear head or you are just being funny.... The term of shifting like a mouse trap refers to the quickness of each shift.
Neither a gear head nor being funny. I'm saying a mouse trap slams shut and then doesn't move. It's expression fail time in 41.
gsteinb is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:20 PM
  #54  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
"mouse trap fast" would be a more appropriate expression than "like a mouse trap."
baribari is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:21 PM
  #55  
joe_5700's Avatar
CAT4
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,681
Likes: 0
From: Omaha, Nebraska

Bikes: 2009 Cervélo S1, 2009 Felt F75, 2010 Cannondale Synapse Carbon 5, 2011 Cannondale CAADx, 2011 Specialized Transition Elite

Originally Posted by gsteinb
Neither a gear head nor being funny. I'm saying a mouse trap slams shut and then doesn't move. It's expression fail time in 41.
True. It does not move until it is reset or in the case of biking, another shift is made.... Are you always this petty?
joe_5700 is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:23 PM
  #56  
joe_5700's Avatar
CAT4
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,681
Likes: 0
From: Omaha, Nebraska

Bikes: 2009 Cervélo S1, 2009 Felt F75, 2010 Cannondale Synapse Carbon 5, 2011 Cannondale CAADx, 2011 Specialized Transition Elite

Originally Posted by baribari
"mouse trap fast" would be a more appropriate expression than "like a mouse trap."
Redundant. Kind of like saying fast CAAD9 on here.
joe_5700 is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:29 PM
  #57  
gsteinb's Avatar
out walking the earth
Sheldon Brown Memorial - Titanium
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 21,440
Likes: 752
From: Lake Placid, NY
Not petty. I just actually place value on the English language
gsteinb is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:33 PM
  #58  
TwoHeadsBrewing's Avatar
Wildflower Century
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
From: Chico, CA

Bikes: Trek Soho, Fisher Aquila

Like others have said, the weight will not be the main difference but the level of components. Typically a 16# CF/Ti bike is going to cost you upwards of $1,800 but will come with better, lighter components. The hubs, BB, crankset, deraillers will operate more smoothly and result in less drag and greater efficiency. In addition a stiffer BB and frame in general is going to help more of your energy output get to the rear wheel. If you were to get on a 16# CF bike and ride 5 miles, then do it again with a 5# weight it would make almost no difference because the components are the same. But often with a more expensive bike you're not only talking about weight, but quality of parts, frame stiffness and overall design.

So if you are committed to the sport, get a better bike and you won't regret it. If you're not sure, just keep riding and then figure it out.
TwoHeadsBrewing is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:35 PM
  #59  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by joe_5700
Redundant. Kind of like saying fast CAAD9 on here.
A CAAD9 is only fast if the rider is... the same goes for any bike.
baribari is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:37 PM
  #60  
joe_5700's Avatar
CAT4
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,681
Likes: 0
From: Omaha, Nebraska

Bikes: 2009 Cervélo S1, 2009 Felt F75, 2010 Cannondale Synapse Carbon 5, 2011 Cannondale CAADx, 2011 Specialized Transition Elite

Originally Posted by gsteinb
Not petty. I just actually place value on the English language
Thanks for clarifying.
joe_5700 is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:39 PM
  #61  
joe_5700's Avatar
CAT4
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,681
Likes: 0
From: Omaha, Nebraska

Bikes: 2009 Cervélo S1, 2009 Felt F75, 2010 Cannondale Synapse Carbon 5, 2011 Cannondale CAADx, 2011 Specialized Transition Elite

Originally Posted by baribari
A CAAD9 is only fast if the rider is... the same goes for any bike.

Oh, I completely agree. Just do some searching around here and you will see what I mean.
joe_5700 is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:40 PM
  #62  
gsteinb's Avatar
out walking the earth
Sheldon Brown Memorial - Titanium
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 21,440
Likes: 752
From: Lake Placid, NY
Honestly, when you take a rig from your stable and it shifts like a mousetrap someone is bound to lose an eye.
gsteinb is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:42 PM
  #63  
abstractform20's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,884
Likes: 2
if youre in good shape it is a very noticeable difference.
abstractform20 is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 02:53 PM
  #64  
Grumpy McTrumpy's Avatar
gmt
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 12,509
Likes: 3
From: Binghamton, NY
Originally Posted by gsteinb
Honestly, when you take a rig from your stable and it shifts like a mousetrap someone is bound to lose an eye.
don't you mean a "Steed"?
Grumpy McTrumpy is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 03:26 PM
  #65  
Je pose, donc je suis.
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,898
Likes: 6
From: Back. Here.
Originally Posted by njkayaker
Reduced weight has a small effect on average speed.
I thought we all decided not to mention this "average speed" concept.
Pedaleur is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 04:01 PM
  #66  
SwingBlade's Avatar
Here to Learn
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
From: SoCal, USA

Bikes: 2008 Specialized S-works Tarmac SL & Specialized Hybrid

Originally Posted by TwoHeadsBrewing
Like others have said, the weight will not be the main difference but the level of components. Typically a 16# CF/Ti bike is going to cost you upwards of $1,800 but will come with better, lighter components. The hubs, BB, crankset, deraillers will operate more smoothly and result in less drag and greater efficiency. In addition a stiffer BB and frame in general is going to help more of your energy output get to the rear wheel. If you were to get on a 16# CF bike and ride 5 miles, then do it again with a 5# weight it would make almost no difference because the components are the same. But often with a more expensive bike you're not only talking about weight, but quality of parts, frame stiffness and overall design.

So if you are committed to the sport, get a better bike and you won't regret it. If you're not sure, just keep riding and then figure it out.
+1

It is the relative technological gains as overall bike weight plummets that yields both real and perceived differences. With respect to comparing a 22 pound bike with a 15 pound bike, the meaningful differences are not so much related to weight savings as to the efficiencies resulting from the technological advantages and efficiencies inherent with successively lighter bikes. These efficiencies make a real difference in energy expenditure and endurance particularly with respect to climbs, which is why although speed gains are minimal, performance gains are often meaningful. The accompanying perceived gains of such technology, while perhaps not strictly quantifiable on a case-by-case basis, likely result in varying degrees of improvement in attitude and confidence.
SwingBlade is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 06:53 PM
  #67  
gsteinb's Avatar
out walking the earth
Sheldon Brown Memorial - Titanium
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 21,440
Likes: 752
From: Lake Placid, NY
Originally Posted by Grumpy McTrumpy
don't you mean a "Steed"?
well I suppose it could be, but you miss the beauty of mixing metaphors.
gsteinb is offline  
Reply
Old 06-24-10 | 08:05 PM
  #68  
Banned.
 
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 363
Likes: 0
From: London, Ohio

Bikes: Fuji Team 09, Schwinn Paramount 91, Fuji Discovery 90's

mobike_moexcite is offline  
Reply
Old 06-25-10 | 05:08 PM
  #69  
grymg's Avatar
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
From: Fremont, CA
Originally Posted by rushbikes
If you're taking 3 pounds out of the wheels (aka unsprung mass), you'll notice the difference in how the bike feels and performs. It'll have more of a racy/rocket ship feel to it.

If the weight is coming off the frames or components (aka sprung mass), you're not going to notice much of a difference at all.
Just wondering, if looking to upgrade should I upgrade the wheels or the frame? I've always gotten recommendations to get the frame I want first.
grymg is offline  
Reply
Old 06-25-10 | 05:36 PM
  #70  
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
Community Builder
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 15,263
Likes: 1,763
From: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Originally Posted by baribari
It's not just hills that less weight makes faster, it's acceleration to your max 'cruising' speed from a stop. It takes forever for me and my 27 pound bike to reach 20-21 which is how fast I can go in a straight line with a moderate effort, but every time I slow down it takes that much longer to get back to that speed.
Weight does matter more when accelerating.
27 lbs is unusually heavy. A typical weight is 20lbs. Compared to 16 lbs, it won't take "forever" to accelerate the 20 lb bike. I manage to keep up with my 26lb bike with people riding lighter (18lb) bikes.

Originally Posted by baribari
A lighter bike would probably reach that speed a few seconds shorter.
I like your "certainty". The magnitude of the performance enhancement is still small.

Originally Posted by baribari
This is especially relevant in criteriums, especially ones with hills.
You're talking about racing. Small differences in performance are much more valuable to racers.

Originally Posted by baribari
That, and riding in traffic, or around cities.
And the value here is much, much less!

(Talk to Joeybike about riding around NOLA with his LHT!)

=================

My point isn't that reduced weight yields more performance (that's obvious). If reducing weight was free, we clearly all choose to ride the lightest appropriate bicycle.

Many people expect large enhancements in performance due to reduced weights and that doesn't happen!

Last edited by njkayaker; 06-25-10 at 05:40 PM.
njkayaker is offline  
Reply
Old 06-25-10 | 05:44 PM
  #71  
Senior Member
15 Anniversary
Community Builder
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 15,263
Likes: 1,763
From: Far beyond the pale horizon.
Originally Posted by TwoHeadsBrewing
Typically a 16# CF/Ti bike is going to cost you upwards of $1,800 but will come with better, lighter components. The hubs, BB, crankset, deraillers will operate more smoothly and result in less drag and greater efficiency. In addition a stiffer BB and frame in general is going to help more of your energy output get to the rear wheel. If you were to get on a 16# CF bike and ride 5 miles, then do it again with a 5# weight it would make almost no difference because the components are the same. But often with a more expensive bike you're not only talking about weight, but quality of parts, frame stiffness and overall design.
What $1800 bike weighs 16lbs?

Anyway, as long as we are not talking about junk, the increase in "efficiency" of those more-expensive parts will give you is still going to be small.
njkayaker is offline  
Reply
Old 06-25-10 | 05:56 PM
  #72  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh

Bikes: Domane 5.9, Cannondale Super X, Dedaciai Nuerissimo.

Take 25 bucks and buy a 45 lb. bike on craigslist. Put in 5 miles on it then get on the other bike. Just like a batter with a weight.

Last edited by nivekdodge; 06-25-10 at 05:57 PM. Reason: spelling
nivekdodge is offline  
Reply
Old 06-25-10 | 05:58 PM
  #73  
Senior Member
Titanium Club Membership
15 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,201
Likes: 289
From: Vancouver, BC
Originally Posted by SwingBlade
With respect to comparing a 22 pound bike with a 15 pound bike, the meaningful differences are not so much related to weight savings as to the efficiencies resulting from the technological advantages and efficiencies inherent with successively lighter bikes. These efficiencies make a real difference in energy expenditure and endurance particularly with respect to climbs, which is why although speed gains are minimal, performance gains are often meaningful.
Nope. Any performance improvements while climbing are pretty much solely due to the weight loss. Better components may shift nicer and feel better but they won't make you faster up the hill.
gregf83 is offline  
Reply
Old 06-25-10 | 06:46 PM
  #74  
Senior Member
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 719
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by njkayaker
Weight does matter more when accelerating.
27 lbs is unusually heavy.
That's because it's a $125 Schwinn! (used price. MSRP: $285)

A typical weight is 20lbs. Compared to 16 lbs, it won't take "forever" to accelerate the 20 lb bike. I manage to keep up with my 26lb bike with people riding lighter (18lb) bikes.
Most definitely. A 20 pound bike versus a 16 pound bike is pretty minor unless you're a smaller rider (higher percentage of body weight) or trying to climb competitively. OTOH, a 25 or 30 pound bike will be a burden...even if you don't care about speed (you will notice a difference when climbing). Of course, if you're like me and have never even ridden a bicycle that weighs less than 25 pounds, you'd probably never know what you're missing... but the first time you ride one, it WILL feel like a huge difference. Then eventually you'll get used to it, and suddenly you would never even think of riding a bike over 20 pounds again.

I like your "certainty". The magnitude of the performance enhancement is still small.
Scientists don't speak in absolutes. Only preachers and liars do.

You're talking about racing. Small differences in performance are much more valuable to racers.
Seeing as how we're all (well, most of us) riding racing bicycles, I'd say racing performance, even just in theory, must be important to most road riders...hehehe

And the value here is much, much less!
I disagree. When you're starting and stopping constantly (especially with cars behind you), faster acceleration, even in fractional terms, is a pretty big deal. Especially when you're trying to cross traffic at a stop sign (even more so when you're bad at clipping in like me).

(Talk to Joeybike about riding around NOLA with his LHT!)

=================
What is NOLA and what is an LHT?

My point isn't that reduced weight yields more performance (that's obvious). If reducing weight was free, we clearly all choose to ride the lightest appropriate bicycle.
I'm pretty sure most of us are riding the lightest bikes we can afford. The only people who would buy a heavy bike are those people who want to train for hill climbs, and in that case, they probably also have a light bike. That, or people who are either very frugal or very old fashioned...

Many people expect large enhancements in performance due to reduced weights and that doesn't happen!
In cycling, a difference of a few percents, a few seconds, and a few miles per hour are large enhancements. We're not talking about explosives... subtle differences make a big difference.
baribari is offline  
Reply
Old 06-25-10 | 06:50 PM
  #75  
travkat's Avatar
Go as fast as you can
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 733
Likes: 0
From: San Marcos

Bikes: Ritte Bosberg with SRAM Red and Mavic Cosmic Carbone SL's

Originally Posted by furballi
A couple of trips to the bathroom.

Let's see...for an average 150 lbs cyclist, the difference in mass is about 2%. That my friend, is noise in the real world...unless you're doing a time trial.

Want more proof? Buy a cheap $5 speedometer. Put a 5 lbs bag of rice or bean in your backpack and go out for a ride. Come back and let us know if you lost more than 1/2 mph.

https://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.24075
This doesn't address the fact that you may indeed not lose the 1/2mph but you might be working harder (wattage) in order to maintain that speed.
travkat is offline  
Reply


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

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.