KiddSisko

Everyone is different, right. What one person likes in their machine, another person hates. Some like a frame super stiff, while some like it flexy. Me, I like a little flex, but not much. I don't want to hear brakes and chains rubbing while I'm out of the saddle and huffing up a hill. My 16.25 lb Blue RC8, '09 Sram Rival'd bike has a very stiff rear triangle, so that is never a problem. The front end, however, has a slight flex to it. I can feel it at different times. I describe it as "forgiving precision." Like, I never feel as though I'm in danger of an over-steer, or unable to correct a line of travel, or unable to maneuver smoothly through rough patches. I've never lost control of the front end of my bike.

I can partly credit the wheels with how it handles - American Classic Hurricane with 32 spokes, which were designed to accommodate riders 200+ lbs. They came with the bike. I could easily knock off a pound of weight if I bought another set of wheels. And if I didn't like the ride after the change? I certainly wouldn't continue riding on wheels that made me feel uncomfortable or unsafe.

pgjackson

All I'm saying is that the huge majority of people buying computers can't tell the difference between one computer and another no matter what hardware in on the inside (unless you are looking at an old Commodore 64 and comparing it to a new Apple). Just like most cyclist won't be able to tell if one bike is a couple of pounds heavier than another just by riding it.

WhyFi

And all I'm saying is that you're completely, horribly wrong.

My wife is a statistician - when she works from home, she marvels at how much faster her home computer (that I built) can crunch through an analysis vs her work computer; we're talking 3 hours vs 5 hours. A previous co-worker, a quasi-musician that recorded and edited multiple tracks of himself at home, loved the speed improvements when he upgraded his CPU. A photographer client, used to processing batches of 60mp photos, upgrades his computer regularly, including his video card, because of the difference in rendering speed and smoothness. Another former co-worker, this one a serious technophobe, bought the better of two computers simply because it booted faster and launched programs faster. Scads of gamers upgrade their graphics cards every 6 months because some of the newer games will look like a slideshow if they don't.

I get it - you use computers to surf the 'net, maybe do a little word processing, and when you use a spreadsheet, you don't use it so that it can take care of calculations, but because it gives you nice rows and columns to line things up. That's fine, but don't assume that others don't appreciate the difference in computing power - it's just a very bad and very wrong analogy.

Nachoman

An extra pound or two can have an advantage if you're screaming downhill on a windy day.

pgjackson

The huge majority of people buy computers to do internet and e-mail and will never need a max-power system. Just like the huge majority of cyclist will never race their bike or max out the capability of their bike no matter what it weighs. Those who do can probably notice the differences. Don't need to nit-pick an analogy.

jmX

pg, I agree with your analogy, except its probably more like 1 of 10 needs and notices extra power, rather than 1 of 10,000 as you said. I think that's all the other guy is trying to say.

As for bike weight, my 24lb bike feels like its made of lead compared to my 17lb bike, but on the flat MUP the speed is nearly the same. Up Mt Baldy, the 24lb bike would cost me quite a bit of time. When I'm trying for a new personal best up the mountain, every ounce counts *.

* I'm as lean as I can be, so bike weight is where I make my savings

njkayaker

Note that the effect of weight on running is larger than when riding because the weight when running bobs up and down. The weight on a bicycle is carried up hill on a much-smoother/more-direct path.

njkayaker

It's easy to quantify and easy to talk about and easy to fix (it just takes money).

The other thing that many people keep forgetting is that tiny benefits are worth a lot to racers who have invested already done all they can do to be faster. Put another way, a few seconds can be very valuable in winning a race but isn't important in "normal" riding.

njkayaker

If there's an effect that isn't just placebo, it might not have much to do with the difference in weight.

pgjackson

Ok, perhaps 99.99% is an exageration. The point remains. I also noticed a small difference when I went from my 25lb Fuji to a 18-19lb Felt. But the hills didn't get any easier for some reason.

AdelaaR

That.
Unless you are racing ... weight is always over emphasized.

AdelaaR

Exactly.
I'm a computer technician and internet install guy and I am your witness that 99% of computer users do not need a superfast machine.
The examples given by WhyFi are the exceptions to the rule.

patentcad

Am I overweight?

Need you ask?

heckler

I agree with whyfi that it is probably more like 86-92% (if picking random numbers might as well be precise) that don't use them. But gamers alone make up more than 1% of the computer market so this 99% number is too inflated.

Val23708

Except that the majority of your customers are in that group because if they were technical enough to need a fast machine, they wouldn't be calling you.

rm -rf

Even a small water bottle's 20 ounces of water weighs 1.3 lbs, or 590 grams. I can't tell the difference on a climb when my two 24 oz bottles (1400 grams!) are full or empty. (I do notice the difference if I pick up the bike.)

AdelaaR

If I call it "9 in 10" ... will you stop "sifting mosquitos" then?

I would take a commodore64 over an apple any day

WhyFi

Yeah, the enthusiast hardware market is a tough one to pin down, but what we do know is that it is huge ($50B+) industry. A study in 2009 showed about 300 million total PCs sold, more than 100 million of them with DX10 or better capability and an estimated 70 million of them used for gaming in conjunction with more pedestrian uses. We also know that the average replacement rate of a computer is once ever 4 years, certainly well within the physical lifespan of most hardware -why are they replacing them if not for increased capability? I think that that demonstrates that users can appreciate the increased performance headroom.

Bingo - Adelaa evidently isn't familiar with the concept of a random sample.

Ok, enough about stupid computers in a stupid bike conversation. It was a dumb, wrong analogy, period.

AdelaaR

Why do you think you have the right to call "period"?
I think the analogy was not just a little good ... I even think it was perfect.

runningDoc

so the lighter bike is the better bike all other things being near equal?

cyclezen

[QUOTE=Looigi;12776410] Like others have said, the difference in bike weight is small compared to the total weight of the rider/bike combination. It's significant only at the pinnacle of competition.
QUOTE]

It's also significant to any and all average riders, when they are pushing at the extent of their abilities/ going a little further than they are comfortable with/ riding in groups where accels and jumps are common.
With everyone here who espouses that bike weight of 2 lbs is no biggie, I would put big money that each of you opt for lighter weight, given that option and a reasonable cost.
Personally I have always opted fo r lighter weight, given equivalent or better performance and reasonable (at that decision moment) cost.
Other thing is that the current level of bikes, a $3000 machine should reasonably be near 18 lbs or less.
SO I would expect better of the Wilier.
Wheels do make a huge difference and depending on what they are, they may contribute to a lighter or heavier weight, and have a huge affect on performance.
As for the Focus Izalco - I ride MD frames = approx 56 cm virtual ST - the Focus with it's 74 deg ST would be completely untenable for me. I find the Germans, Felt and Focus, do really really weird things with geometry.

doing a long climb on a 2lb heavier bike is very noticeable
If all I did was ride on my lonesome, or ride with others who were all considerably slower and heavier than me - OK, weight might be no biggie
however, I do ride in groups with riders whom I mark, and are lighter, much younger and faster than I.
I'm now fast approaching the point where nothing will help...
but until that day, lightweight, good wheels and rubber, and tenacious wheel suckage wins, hands down

pgjackson

I can't believe you guys are still discussing my analogy. The analogy was not wrong...my number was inaccurate. I should have just said a "huge majority" instead of 99.99%. Big deal. Let's get past this.

fogrider

here's the thing, if you're going up a hill at 75% effort, the weight will not make any difference. if you're going to go 100% at some point, every gram will count. if you like the ride, put money into carbon tubulars and you will notice a difference. weight saved in the rims will be equal to saving twice as much on the frame or hubs. my bike weighs in at 16 pounds with carbon tubulars, but I train on steel bike that weighs in at about 19 pounds...yeah I notice a difference.

KiddSisko

JC. There are so many factors involved with any ride involving any challenge. At our (41) level, weight of 2 lbs one way or the other isn't going to matter at all. The rest of this discussion is just roadie hot air talk. Whenever I'm out on a ride and someone starts getting technical about bike minutia, or overly critical about weight issues, my eyes glaze over. Rider form and ride philosophy is far more important and interesting.

I know most of you understand this, but I also realize you just can't help yourselves. It's what guys do in bars and taverns the world over.

Val23708

Are you really trying to represent all of us?