Forum home Road cycling forum Road beginners

Bike weight

GuinnyGuinny Posts: 10
edited July 2009 in Road beginners
hi folks

considering buying a cheap road bike, weight states as 11.4kg.

is this a lot?

also would I notice much of a difference as a complete novice in a few kg? I will be riding for fun and fitness, not going to bother about times, average speed and all that jazz (though from seeing how addictive it can be this will more than likely change!)

cheers

Kev

Posts

  • NoNotAgainNoNotAgain Posts: 91
    11.4 is quite a lot. Mine is 7.4 without any major weight tuning yet.
    Nonetheless since you don't want to run in competitions and probably never cross the Alps, a fitting geometry is a lot more important than weight.
    1,000km+ a month, strictly road.
  • I very much doubt you'll notice a great deal of difference if you're just starting out! At the end of the day you can loose a couple of kilos off a bike but if the rider weighs 90kg it's like throwing a deck chair of the Titanic!

    My Allez weighs close to 11 kilos (I would guess, have never weighed it) but I weigh 67. This means that the combined weight of me and the bike probably weighs less then a lot of people without a bike! At low level cycling the rider weight will be a lot more significant I would say!

    BTW, I can guarantee you will shortly be worrying about times and improving etc. I bought my bike in Easter with the same attitude as you, just because I liked getting out in the countryside and the freedom of it all... Now I'm always thinking about it, most of my plans are now based my plans to go for a ride! And I love it! :D
  • BhimaBhima Posts: 2,145
    Lighter Bike =

    + Quicker up hills
    - Slower down hills
    + Less energy used for controlling the bike (attcking hills off the saddle/sprints etc)
    - Less control in the wind (especially crosswinds). You'll be blown about more.
    + Quicker acceleration, therefore, higher max speed in an all-out effort from zero.
    - Expensive
  • NoNotAgainNoNotAgain Posts: 91
    BTW, I can guarantee you will shortly be worrying about times and improving etc. I bought my bike in Easter with the same attitude as you, just because I liked getting out in the countryside and the freedom of it all... Now I'm always thinking about it, most of my plans are now based my plans to go for a ride! And I love it! :D

    A pretty common disease among cyclists.
    1,000km+ a month, strictly road.
  • carefulcareful Posts: 720
    It is quite heavy but your own power to weight ratio is far more significant. Last weekend I was out with some clubmates for a long hilly ride. I was on my 7.5 kg titanium bike with all the toys but I got dropped by a guy on an old steel frame bike complete with pannier rack, mudguards and a large saddle bag. I have come to the conclusion that the strongest riders are those that spend their time riding rather than drooling over the latest kit.
  • MettanMettan Posts: 2,103
    My Ribble's quite heavy at ~ 9.5/10 kg - happy enough with progress though (given the knee injuries).
  • EscargotEscargot Posts: 361
    Bhima wrote:
    Lighter Bike =

    + Quicker up hills
    - Slower down hills
    + Less energy used for controlling the bike (attcking hills off the saddle/sprints etc)
    - Less control in the wind (especially crosswinds). You'll be blown about more.
    + Quicker acceleration, therefore, higher max speed in an all-out effort from zero.
    - Expensive

    Please don't get me wrong as I'm not starting :D but is this really the case with speed down hills and the wind ?

    I ask as a total beginner but am genuinely surprised a lighter bike will be affected that much. I've just bought a much lighter bike (about 2.5kg lighter) and whilst I fully agree with the handling etc. I weigh 75kg. Does this really not outweigh the 2.5kg saved on the mass of the bike ?

    It seems illogical to me but again I'm a complete novice so am just interested in the rationale.

    Cheers

    D
  • Surf-MattSurf-Matt Posts: 5,952
    Coming from a MTB perspective (and now have an Allez Elite 2010 too), a lighter bike handles differently - I ride Mrs Matt's 28lb Rockhopper on occasions - it's less agile, less "darty" but does seem to just plough through anything. My 23lb Stumpjumper skips over everything, is more twitchy but easier to flick around and bunnyhop. I don't notice much difference when climbing and most differences are more to do with geometry than weight.

    The Allez is very light - don't know the official weight but it's signicantly lighter than the Stumpy (maybe 18lbs?) but I think fitness and strength are much more important than shaving a few grams off your bike.
  • pickledpickled Posts: 439
    I've just bought a much lighter bike (about 2.5kg lighter) and whilst I fully agree with the handling etc. I weigh 75kg. Does this really not outweigh the 2.5kg saved on the mass of the bike ?

    2.5kg or 5.5ibs is quite a lot.
    Try going for a run carrying 2.5 bags of sugar and tell me if you notice the difference.
  • fnegronifnegroni Posts: 794
    Escargot wrote:
    Bhima wrote:
    Lighter Bike =

    + Quicker up hills
    - Slower down hills
    + Less energy used for controlling the bike (attcking hills off the saddle/sprints etc)
    - Less control in the wind (especially crosswinds). You'll be blown about more.
    + Quicker acceleration, therefore, higher max speed in an all-out effort from zero.
    - Expensive

    Please don't get me wrong as I'm not starting :D but is this really the case with speed down hills and the wind ?

    I ask as a total beginner but am genuinely surprised a lighter bike will be affected that much. I've just bought a much lighter bike (about 2.5kg lighter) and whilst I fully agree with the handling etc. I weigh 75kg. Does this really not outweigh the 2.5kg saved on the mass of the bike ?

    It seems illogical to me but again I'm a complete novice so am just interested in the rationale.

    Cheers

    D

    I think more than the bike it is the wheel's profile.
  • GuinnyGuinny Posts: 10
    cheers folks, thats helped me make my mind up.

    Now just need to convince the Mrs that buying me a bike (with the health benefits) is a good idea!
  • ShezzerShezzer Posts: 229
    Escargot wrote:
    Bhima wrote:
    Lighter Bike =

    + Quicker up hills
    - Slower down hills
    + Less energy used for controlling the bike (attcking hills off the saddle/sprints etc)
    - Less control in the wind (especially crosswinds). You'll be blown about more.
    + Quicker acceleration, therefore, higher max speed in an all-out effort from zero.
    - Expensive

    Please don't get me wrong as I'm not starting :D but is this really the case with speed down hills and the wind ?

    I ask as a total beginner but am genuinely surprised a lighter bike will be affected that much. I've just bought a much lighter bike (about 2.5kg lighter) and whilst I fully agree with the handling etc. I weigh 75kg. Does this really not outweigh the 2.5kg saved on the mass of the bike ?

    It seems illogical to me but again I'm a complete novice so am just interested in the rationale.

    Cheers

    D

    I'm no expert and couldn't quote any science but I certainly find my cheap / heavy training bike to be more stable on downhills than either of my lightweight speed machines. In terms of responsiveness though it's like riding a barge in comparison to the other two.
  • EscargotEscargot Posts: 361
    pickled wrote:
    I've just bought a much lighter bike (about 2.5kg lighter) and whilst I fully agree with the handling etc. I weigh 75kg. Does this really not outweigh the 2.5kg saved on the mass of the bike ?

    2.5kg or 5.5ibs is quite a lot.
    Try going for a run carrying 2.5 bags of sugar and tell me if you notice the difference.

    I can imagine that would be true for running as you have to support all of the weight but cycling is surely different as most of the time you have already generated some momentum.

    2.5kg is only 3% of the total mass so can't imagine it makes that much difference for regular riders (like me). I guess I'm just coming from it from the viewpoint that I barely notice the change between the moment I set off on a ride i.e. carrying 2kg or 2 litres of water, and afterwards when I've drunk it all.
  • ride_wheneverride_whenever Posts: 13,279
    geometry and fit is a LOT more important...

    My old mtb was based around a jump frame so stupid geometry for riding around, the fit was okay and it weighs about the same as my new bike which feels so much lighter.
  • EscargotEscargot Posts: 361
    Shezzer wrote:
    Escargot wrote:
    Bhima wrote:
    Lighter Bike =

    + Quicker up hills
    - Slower down hills
    + Less energy used for controlling the bike (attcking hills off the saddle/sprints etc)
    - Less control in the wind (especially crosswinds). You'll be blown about more.
    + Quicker acceleration, therefore, higher max speed in an all-out effort from zero.
    - Expensive

    Please don't get me wrong as I'm not starting :D but is this really the case with speed down hills and the wind ?

    I ask as a total beginner but am genuinely surprised a lighter bike will be affected that much. I've just bought a much lighter bike (about 2.5kg lighter) and whilst I fully agree with the handling etc. I weigh 75kg. Does this really not outweigh the 2.5kg saved on the mass of the bike ?

    It seems illogical to me but again I'm a complete novice so am just interested in the rationale.

    Cheers

    D

    I'm no expert and couldn't quote any science but I certainly find my cheap / heavy training bike to be more stable on downhills than either of my lightweight speed machines. In terms of responsiveness though it's like riding a barge in comparison to the other two.

    Yeah, don't get me wrong. My new bike feels so much more responsive but it seems hard to imagine that taking 2.5kg off the total mass of a bike can have such a difference (downhill) when you strap 10x more mass to the bike i.e. me.

    The same goes for the statement about wind. The human body is less aerodynamic by far when considering the profile of the bike frame so don't understand why you would be affected more by having a lighter bike. In terms of CoG it can't change by much so is difficult to understand why you would be more unstable experiencing a cross wind.

    Anyway I apologise for the ramblings and also for hijacking the thread.

    Guinny.

    I've had a cheap and cheerful road bike for a while and have really enjoyed getting out and about on it and whilst getting into cycling I have enjoyed not really worrying about weight etc. As Lance says it's not about the bike so while getting cycling fit I'm not sure it really matters how much your bike weighs.

    However, I've now gone down the slippery slope of buying myself something rather light and nimble. I think it comes to us all so enjoy the innocence of a straightforward road bike as it probably won't be long until you'll be thinking about carbon and exotic groupsets :D
  • John.TJohn.T Posts: 3,698
    Handling, stability and how it handles cross wind gusts is far more about the geomtry of the bike. My Madone 5.2 is my lightest by about 1 kilo but is far better in all these respects. Cross wind gusts just move the bike a few inches but it holds its line even on tri bars in a near gale. Last time riders were pulling out of our club open 25 because they could not keep their disc wheeled bikes on the road. I just had a tough day but felt secure.
  • NoNotAgainNoNotAgain Posts: 91
    Guinny wrote:
    Now just need to convince the Mrs that buying me a bike (with the health benefits) is a good idea!
    Congratulations. You don't even own a bike yet but you already have the cyclist's state of mind. You will love it.
    How about this one?
    4882dc7eae53e
    1,000km+ a month, strictly road.
Sign In or Register to comment.