35lb Mountain Bike - Where's the weight?

Cheeky
Cheeky Posts: 113
edited January 2008 in MTB workshop & tech
I own a 4/5 year old Claud Butler Cape Wrath that I have slowly upgraded over the years but which (I discovered the other day) still weighs 35lb!

It now has a Marzocchi MX Comp fork, XT crankset with Deore shifters, mech and hydraulic brakes, XT hubs with Mavic 717 disc rims. The original bits are frame , bars, stem and seatpost, so where is all this weight?

Admittedly it was weighed with pedals but I would have half expected it to be below 30lb, so my next move is to upgrade the frame to get the weight down but I can't see that a decent 4lb frame would save that much? And I can't see upgrading all that is Deore to XT would save much so what am I missing?

Anybody know what a Cape Wrath frame from 2003 might weigh? I'm trying not to get too hung up on weight as, after all, a heavy bike is a great trainign aid, but any suggestions or shared experiences most welcome.

Cheers

Comments

  • nicklouse
    nicklouse Posts: 50,673
    frame, and wheels and i guess tubes and tyres.

    Also how did you weigh it?
    "Do not follow where the path may lead, Go instead where there is no path, and Leave a Trail."
    Parktools :?:SheldonBrown
  • Cheeky
    Cheeky Posts: 113
    Using my ever so accurate new fishing scales (which like an anorak I calibrated first)!!!!
  • Andy B
    Andy B Posts: 8,115
    A complete '05 Cape Wrath bike weighs 31lbs in standard spec with SPD pedals, not sure on the frame weight though.
    2385861000_d125abe796_m.jpg
  • Cheeky
    Cheeky Posts: 113
    Andy_B wrote:
    A complete '05 Cape Wrath bike weighs 31lbs in standard spec with SPD pedals, not sure on the frame weight though.
    I guess that sounds about right then once I've added the extra weight of disc brakes, and other assorted "bits".
    Thanks for the help
  • sounds like you calibrated your scales to over estimate so that you could boast about the size of your fish :D
    06 Kona Blast with RS Tora solo airs :)
  • Cheeky
    Cheeky Posts: 113
    saintadolf wrote:
    sounds like you calibrated your scales to over estimate so that you could boast about the size of your fish :D
    That's assuming I catch any bloody fish in the first place!!!!!
  • nicklouse
    nicklouse Posts: 50,673
    Cheeky wrote:
    Using my ever so accurate new fishing scales (which like an anorak I calibrated first)!!!!
    May i hazard that this weight might also be at the extreme limits of the fish scale?

    Disc brakes over V's is hardly a pound? what were the extras?
    "Do not follow where the path may lead, Go instead where there is no path, and Leave a Trail."
    Parktools :?:SheldonBrown
  • supersonic
    supersonic Posts: 82,708
    I doubt the frame is any more than 5lbs. What discs? You'd be suprised how much lard the seatpost, bars, saddle and stem hide, and the fork is no lightweight.
  • mattv
    mattv Posts: 992
    Tyres can make a huge difference. You can get a difference of upto a pound between skinny tyres and fat tyres, PER TYRE. Wheel weights vary too, and both these things you can double when working out how a bike handles, as its rotating mass. Try taking a wheel out of the bike, then hold the axle and spin the wheel. As its rotating, try to turn the wheel sideways (make the axle vertical not horizontal). This is what you try to do every time you turn a corner, and the heavier the wheel/tyre, the harder it is to turn it. So, lighter wheels, more manouvrable bike.