If weight is so important...

volké

... why don't pro bikes weigh 15lbs?

Looking through the 'Pro Bike' articles on the main site, the pro's are riding [non-TT] bikes that are consistently over the UCI limit. Admittedly, they all have powermeters that most of us don't have, but 'simple' things like carbon cages, titanium pedal axles, carbon saddle rails, carbon handlebars etc. would all contribute and are frequently neglected. To be honest, I was quite surprised by this.

So if they don't try to save weight everywhere they can - then has the industry just duped people into spending thousands of pounds on equipment that makes no significant difference?

Or am I missing something?

Anonymous

The pros ride what the sponsors tell them to.

Pretre

Agree with NapD & also the pro's prize stiffness over almost everything - if a bike is super-stiff then being super light is not so important.

softlad

but they also tend to favour kit that can be relied upon, which may not always be the lightest...

rdt

Volké wrote:

So if they don't try to save weight everywhere they can - then has the industry just duped people into spending thousands of pounds on equipment that makes no significant difference?

Or am I missing something?

The industry's raison d'etre is to make money, and it does that by selling products with strong margins, and importantly, by encouraging a short replacement cycle, i.e. encouraging you to feel dissatisfied with what you already have, by having you believe that newer products will be much superior.

If there's any "duping", it's in encouraging people to think that:
(1) the year-on-year marginal improvements, and the marginal differences between different products, are greater than they really are; and that:
(2) these improvements and differences actually matter much for most people.

The vast majority of people don't race, and of those who do race, the vast majority do so only at inconsequential levels. So, there's just a tiny minority for whom you might argue that absolute performance really matters. The industry's skill is in encouraging as many people as possible to think that these things matter a lot.

But it's a free world, and people with money in their pockets have every right to spend their hard earned on whatever they like, whether they're being suckered or not

Steve_F

It's the motors they have hidden in their frames that ups the weight isn't it?

orangepip

I think you'll also find that the UCI have imposed a minimum weight on pro bikes... a lot of teams ride lighter bikes but then have to put weights in area's like the bottom bracket or down the seat tube where the weight is as neutral as possible

Anonymous

orangepip wrote:

I think you'll also find that the UCI have imposed a minimum weight on pro bikes... a lot of teams ride lighter bikes but then have to put weights in area's like the bottom bracket or down the seat tube where the weight is as neutral as possible

Not necessarily, some bikes, like Sky's are almost a kilo over the weight limit. Hence the OP's question.

Mad Roadie

weight is dead important - especially when climbing - if i have a climb at the end of a race I always prepare ahead and drink whats left in the water bottle to get as much weight off the bike as possible

EKIMIKE

But Dogma's are very heavy relative to many frames used in the Pro peloton. It is true that a fair number of them have to add weight.

It is in part down to the simple fact that Pro teams are sponsored, therefore they ride their sponsors' kit.

Things to consider though are the many different set-ups a rider could have for each stage of each race. If the stage is in the mountains, ending on something like the Ventoux or Tourmalet then you can bet the bike will be at 6.8kg's. You'll see the low profile rims in particular come out then. Much lighter than the deep seaction rims.

For a flat stage they will probably put on the heavy aero wheels or ride the heavier aero frame.

Although it's not a hard and fast rule, in general aero kit is heavy. Dics wheels, deep section wheels, aero frames. Even so, a 7.XXKG bike is still very light. I doubt however that any of the pro's are riding 10KG beasts.

rdt

Mad Roadie wrote:

if i have a climb at the end of a race I always prepare ahead and drink whats left in the water bottle to get as much weight off the bike as possible

Wise move. Or do as Bobet (or whoever it was in the 50s) used to do, and move his bidon to his jersey pocket, to reduce bike weight, at the foot of climbs.

Pokerface

Pro bikes in general will be close to the 6.8kg minimum. Some will go over (especially if they have heavier items such as SRMs on them) but rarely by more than a pound or two. Sky's bikes are a bit of an exception.

EKIMIKE

Sky bikes are heavy because:

Dogma is heavy - about 1,400g painted.
Di2 is heavy
Hed/Shimano wheels are heavy
SRM is heavy

BUT

All the above are very reliable products. It is a surprise thought that Mr Marginal Gains went for such sponsors.

jermas

weight is dead important - especially when climbing - if i have a climb at the end of a race I always prepare ahead and drink whats left in the water bottle to get as much weight off the bike as possible

Doesn't the weight of water get transferred from your bottle to your stomach?

jermas

I have removed my ears, 6 fingers, 8 toes, and my testicles. I find I'm much faster up the hills but don't seem to have much luck with the women.

father_jack

Mad Roadie wrote:

weight is dead important - especially when climbing - if i have a climb at the end of a race I always prepare ahead and drink whats left in the water bottle to get as much weight off the bike as possible

errmmmm.....

B1ghubba

rdt wrote:

Mad Roadie wrote:

if i have a climb at the end of a race I always prepare ahead and drink whats left in the water bottle to get as much weight off the bike as possible

Wise move. Or do as Bobet (or whoever it was in the 50s) used to do, and move his bidon to his jersey pocket, to reduce bike weight, at the foot of climbs.

You're both mad, you're still lifting the same weight up the hill.

You'd be better off having a poo at the bottom of a climb.

synchronicity

Not so is it though?
A bike that feels lighter to move around (even laterally) is a mental/pschological advantage...

rdt

B1ghubba wrote:

rdt wrote:

Mad Roadie wrote:

if i have a climb at the end of a race I always prepare ahead and drink whats left in the water bottle to get as much weight off the bike as possible

Wise move. Or do as Bobet (or whoever it was in the 50s) used to do, and move his bidon to his jersey pocket, to reduce bike weight, at the foot of climbs.

You're both mad, you're still lifting the same weight up the hill.

You'd be better off having a poo at the bottom of a climb.

While evacuating your own "tubes" at the base of climbs might not always be possible or practical, you can gain a modest climbing advantage by vacuum-pumping your frame's tubes and helium-filling your tyres.

Both the vacuum and helium will tend to leak, so you'll need to carry a suitable dual-purpose pump and helium supply. At the base of climbs, be sure to transfer this equipment from your frame to your jersey pockets, so as to minimise your bike's weight on the climb.