Are magazine weights accurate?

gcwebbyuk
gcwebbyuk Posts: 1,926
edited June 2009 in MTB general
Bought what MTB this month and it showed the Stumpjumper HT comp as weighing 10.5kgs without pedals.

Weighed my Stumpy (modified with Ritchy Carbon bar, RaceFace DeusXC stem, X-0 shifters and mech, Hope SP XC3 wheels, SDG I-beam seatpost and saddle, Wellgo pedals) and it weighed 10.49 kgs!

On paper the above should have saved around a kg - and my original weight of the bike was 11.4 kgs.

Admitedly my bike was weighed with pedals, but they only weigh 350-400 g.

So either both of my scales - floor and hanging - are wrong, or What MTB have duff scales, or the weighed the bike full of helium!
«1

Comments

  • Banned!
    Banned! Posts: 34
    maybe they wieghed it without a chain on too?

    i have had a probem with this in the past. the bumph says 'bike weighs 37lbs' but its nearer 40. when I call or email to ask I get a lot of cack and eventually they admit they wieghed it without tubes in or a chain on and everything that could be carbon put on in place of steel or alu.
  • nicklouse
    nicklouse Posts: 50,675
    do the scales both weight the same ? are they both calibrated?
    "Do not follow where the path may lead, Go instead where there is no path, and Leave a Trail."
    Parktools :?:SheldonBrown
  • Andy B
    Andy B Posts: 8,115
    gcwebbyuk is your bike the same size and year model as the one weighed in the mag?
    2385861000_d125abe796_m.jpg
  • Really dont get the fascination with weight, it is more importnat what the person does on the bike, its not like the people who worry are pro s, they are normally the ones who should worry abouit their weight
  • Banned!
    Banned! Posts: 34
    ah, but you are forgetting the weenies who will do anything to shave a few grams, just so they can say 'my bike weighs 15.674lbs. thats 593 grammes less than the standard because I have ti bolts on everything'

    its like a game of top trumps with them.
  • supersonic
    supersonic Posts: 82,708
    which is why us mere mortals need all the help we can get! If weight made no difference we'd all be riding 40lb bikes. I can feel the difference of a kilo less.
  • gcwebbyuk
    gcwebbyuk Posts: 1,926
    Bike is one years difference - but same frame - only spec change from my original to the new bike is Avid Elixir R instead of Juicy 5 brakes, and SLX front mech instead of LX.

    Everything else is the same.

    The bike in the mag appears to be the 19" and mine is the 17" so should be even lighter!

    Both scales show same weight - floor scales were done by me holding the bike, and then subtracting my weight.

    We are talking a big difference though between my bike with original spec and the mag original spec!
  • zero303
    zero303 Posts: 1,162
    Sorry guys but a light bike helps a lot - sure weight weenies stressing over grams and resorting to ti bolts and stuff like that are going to far - particularly chucking on a set of light strong wheels and tyres will transform the most lifeless of bikes by a significant degree.

    Sure it's important what you can do on the bike and you might even out ride someone on a lighter bike but that doesn't mean the bike is making no difference - it just means you'd be killing them even more if they were on a heavier bike.

    I suspect that most people that ask the "what's the point of light bikes" question tend to have not ridden one...
  • zero303
    zero303 Posts: 1,162
    I would take the bathroom scales approach with a serious pinch of salt...
  • gcwebbyuk
    gcwebbyuk Posts: 1,926
    I want my bike light - because I want it light - is that a problem ? :?

    You could say the same thing for people who want x amount travel from their bike when they would be just as quick / happy with y travel!

    I agree with the scales thing, thats why I bought hanging scales, and they give the exact same weight!

    The bathroom scales are high spec digital ones though, so fairly sure of their calibration.
  • supersonic
    supersonic Posts: 82,708
    is it exactly the same frame? I thought they lightened it - plus a few other bits.
  • gcwebbyuk
    gcwebbyuk Posts: 1,926
    Not as far as I know - website doesn't mention that or the magazine article.

    They have changed the other HTs in their range though - more swoopy tubes etc.
  • Banned!
    Banned! Posts: 34
    check if the tubes are double butted and so on. you might find that they new tubes are made slightly heavier for strength or that the bb shell is thicker etc. or maybe you have heavier springs in the forks etc.
  • gcwebbyuk
    gcwebbyuk Posts: 1,926
    Forks are both Fox F90RL

    Frames are identical - for looks and spec - as per their website - also no mention of lighter frame etc, which am sure they would have.

    And as I say my original spec to magazine spec is nearly 1kg thats 2.2 lbs!
  • supersonic
    supersonic Posts: 82,708
    a bit less than that, with pedals added in about 500g difference.
  • gcwebbyuk
    gcwebbyuk Posts: 1,926
    good point supersonic.

    I take it what bike would weigh the bikes with chains/tubes/tyres etc though as previously suggested?
  • toasty
    toasty Posts: 2,598
    check if the tubes are double butted and so on. you might find that they new tubes are made slightly heavier for strength or that the bb shell is thicker etc. or maybe you have heavier springs in the forks etc.

    Double butted? This is a Stumpy, even my old 2003 one was beautifully shaped, butted and hydroformed. A full frame would be about 1600-1500g, knocking a kilo off might be tough work.

    I'd say the weights are A) without pedals as this seems to be the industry norm, B) wildly optimistic. Still a shame they fit 2bliss tyres yet no tubeless rims, that'd knock quite a bit off in innertube weight.
  • zero303 wrote:
    I would take the bathroom scales approach with a serious pinch of salt...
    +1
    I've been using fishing scales (whilst fishing) for 25+ years, and I've seen all the tricks when anglers weigh fish :wink:
    I've found it much easier (and more accurate) to hang the scale from a fixed point. I hang mine (at home) from a door frame.
    *Rock Lobster Team Tig SL (22lb 14oz)
    *C. Late 1950's Fixed Gear
    *1940 Raleigh Dawn Tourist with rod brakes
  • well didnt that open up a tin of worms! maybe im just jealous as i cant afford the luxury of a super light bike,i have to make do with a giant scr :? but i just think that is is just about one upmanship ,and people really do forget what they cycle for.... enjoyment ? it is i bit like people who always need the most expensive assos and rapha kit because a magazine says its the dogs twitcher. It normally means they spend money on even if they really shouldnt, then regret it
  • grantway
    grantway Posts: 1,430
    edited January 2009
    I know with race bikes the manufactures normally give the weight of the small
    frame, so the mags may state this without weighing the bike themselves.

    Also when I was in the market in buying a new bike The mags seem to have different
    wheels or tyres than on the spec of the bikes from the manufacture I was intrested in
  • I have found the bathroom scales approach pretty unaccurate,and gives different results every time.

    Weighing individual components on the digital kitchenscales gives results fairly consistent with what I have seen quoted elsewhere ,though.

    Components often vary by 5% or so from manufacturers quoted weights.Add up all those 5% variances of all components and you begin to see why even 2 identically specifed bikes might not be the same.

    Bikes in magazines are always quoted minus pedals,and its surprising how stuff you may not consider like a computer,bottle cage,and so on add up.I believe its not unknown for manufacturers to select the "best " bike for the test and stick in lightweight tubes and other minor tweaks too.......
    2006 Giant XTC
    2010 Giant Defy Advanced
    2016 Boardman Pro 29er
    2016 Pinnacle Lithium 4
    2017 Canondale Supersix Evo
  • toasty
    toasty Posts: 2,598
    PHILATHAM wrote:
    well didnt that open up a tin of worms! maybe im just jealous as i cant afford the luxury of a super light bike,i have to make do with a giant scr :? but i just think that is is just about one upmanship ,and people really do forget what they cycle for.... enjoyment ?

    Nah, I don't think it's getting one up in my eyes. I think it's the one quantifiable way you can make your bike faster and hills easier. Manufacturers bent the truth to get one up on competition, in the end everyone was bending the truth so much that realistic figures just sounded ludicrous. My Zaskar Carbon Team frame seems to be quoted around the net at 1200g, mine weighed 1570g!

    Because I've bought lightweight parts in no way means I don't ride for the fun of it, if anything the fun of it is the problem. It's hard to get out of biking mode when sat at work all day long, far too often I'll drift off into forums, shops and ebay to purchase sparkly bits!

    Besides, racing around the woods for hours on end without getting tired is much more fun. With road riding the weight will affect acceleration and rolling resistance, with mountain biking the weight has a much bigger impact, every bump your bike will be accelerating all over the place, you'll be trimming off speed and accelerating far more often. A lightweight bike will hold it's weight much better and fatigue you much less.
  • gcwebbyuk
    gcwebbyuk Posts: 1,926
    Re: bathroom scales:

    The scales I used were expensive digital scales that gave the same reading 5 times on the trott.

    I have recently bought a digital hanging scale which is mounted to one of the metal beams in the garage, and the bike or whatever hung underneath.

    Both of these scales gave the same reading, so am pretty sure that the figure is accurate. Would be strange for two totally different scales to show the same reading?

    Am happy with how light the bike is, but like toasty said, browsing forums when not riding does get you into splashing out on your bike, a lot of the parts I have added have been bought off people on this forum, and have been funded by selling parts they have replaced or selling parts off my other bikes etc.
  • For me buying and selling parts,looking for new bits and so on,the bike fettling is almost as much fun as the riding. :D
    2006 Giant XTC
    2010 Giant Defy Advanced
    2016 Boardman Pro 29er
    2016 Pinnacle Lithium 4
    2017 Canondale Supersix Evo
  • toasty
    toasty Posts: 2,598
    For me buying and selling parts,looking for new bits and so on,the bike fettling is almost as much fun as the riding. :D

    Especially in winter :)
  • gcwebbyuk
    gcwebbyuk Posts: 1,926
    I havent actually ridden my bike properly in over two months now, due to injury, so all this swapping and fettling is keeping me happy.

    I really can't wait to get back out on the bike though!

    I rode the bike up and down the alley by my garage yesterday to see how it felt with all the bits, and was planning on a little ride along the seafront today to try and see if my neck and shoulders can take a longer ride - but its blowing a gale outside and peeing it down :(

    At least its getting lighter in the evenings though, so may try and fit a ride in, in the week after work if am up to it - fingers crossed!
  • Dr S
    Dr S Posts: 146
    Manufacturers claimed weights are off, my Kona Kula lists at 20.5lbs from Kona was weighed at 21.8lbs in the shop.

    Mostly manufacturers weights are a sum total off all the claimed weights of the components not inlcuding inner tubes, cables etc

    I likes my bikes light :-)
    Kona Kula Supreme, the hardtail
    Scott Spark 20 the softtail
    Cannondale CAAD9 the roadie
  • robertpb
    robertpb Posts: 1,866
    When testing bikes the tyres are usually changed to a common set between the bikes being tested

    This irons out a big variable it could also explain some of the differences in weights, they may weigh them with the common tyre.

    Also internals of shocks and forks can be changed over a period of time, its the same model but lighter.

    Add to this all the other components that can still look the same but new alloys have shaved a gram here and there.

    Manufacturers each year try to make a bike better and lighter, can't remember an advert where a bke company said this years model is better in every way except it's heavier.

    For all those weight watchers it's easier to trim a kilo off the rider than the bike.
    Now where's that "Get Out of Crash Free Card"
  • toasty
    toasty Posts: 2,598
    robertpb wrote:
    For all those weight watchers it's easier to trim a kilo off the rider than the bike.

    True, it'll make less difference than losing it off the bike though. *Incoming argument*