After wheels, what's the best way to reduce weight?

kbmack

Can anyone please advise on the best way to reduce a bike's weight after changing the wheels? For example, would it be the groupset and so on? Additionally, would doing something like this make a blind bit of notice? Many thanks!

sandyballs

someone with superior intellect will come along soon and tell you everything but after buidling a new carbon bike over winter I can tell you that individually components are not that different in weight. to make any appreciable difference you have to change everything. a full groupset say sora to ultegra i would not expect to get more than about 500grams difference.

Wirral_paul

Tyres and inner tubes will show the biggest effect being rotating mass.

After that, i really wouldnt bother unless its an upgrade for another reason - general wear n tear, ensuring proper fit etc.

Bobbinogs

Before wheels, the best way to reduce weight is to diet and/or ride. A bike weighs about 10kg. I have seen some chunky riders out there looking to save grams with titamium stem bolts.

In all seriousness, buying nice spanky/light kit will make you feel good but some racing snake is still going to pass you on the climbs if you don't train hard and look after yourself. So, if you want to feel good, spend the dough; if you want to go faster, ride more and eat/drink wisely.

bus_ter

A light bike is about 7kg. A heavy road bike is about 11kg. So the difference between a £3000 bike and a £300 bike is about 4kg. That's just 5% the weight of a a large fit adult. You could lose or gain that much weight in a couple of weeks easily changing your diet. It makes little sense spending money swapping componets just to save weight.

You could spend a lot of money trying to save 500g off your bike, or you could goto the toilet before a ride and lose as much weight, or you could drink a glass of water before a ride and gain that much weight...

Anyway after mugging off your question I'll answer it now :-) Try a lightweight saddle and carbon seatpost to shed a few hundred grammes..

mouth

Bobbinogs wrote:

Before wheels, the best way to reduce weight is to diet and/or ride. A bike weighs about 10kg. I have seen some chunky riders out there looking to save grams with titamium stem bolts.

In all seriousness, buying nice spanky/light kit will make you feel good but some racing snake is still going to pass you on the climbs if you don't train hard and look after yourself. So, if you want to feel good, spend the dough; if you want to go faster, ride more and eat/drink wisely.

Wot 'e said.

Hoopdriver

Totally agree.

Trim weight off the rider

styxd

If ignoring the "lose weight off yourself" comments, then I'd say the best place is probably wheels, then tyres/tubes then some good quality finishing kit i.e. bars/stem/seatpost/seat - you can save alot on these items over the stock stuff and it doesnt wear out either. Groupsets are only worth upgrading once they're knackered.

t4tomo

upgrading tyres is worth it - but you'll probably get as much benefit from decreased rolling restance / increased grip when cornering etc than weight per se.

I don't see this obsession with bike weight, as mentioned above losing rider weight is far easier and more effective as is riding more and getting stronger legs.

hodge68

Have 200-300 quid to upgrade from my fulcrum racing 7 to a better set of wheels. But after reading this thread and weighing 100kg :oops: i think i should invest my money in some slim fast.

EarlyGo

hodge68 wrote:

Have 200-300 quid to upgrade from my fulcrum racing 7 to a better set of wheels. But after reading this thread and weighing 100kg :oops: i think i should invest my money in some slim fast.

Totally agree fella! For 300quid Planet -X will sell you a pair of lovely RS80s that will save approx 400g on your Fulcrum 7s. A week on slim fast will save you about 280 quid and give you double the weight loss!

Cheers, EarlyGo

rick_chasey

Eat less.

siamon

Losing 1kg off the bike will be vastly more beneficial than losing 1kg from the rider, whether they are 50 or 100kgs.

nhoj

t4tomo wrote:

I don't see this obsession with bike weight, as mentioned above losing rider weight is far easier and more effective as is riding more and getting stronger legs.

I don't know whether or not it's more effective, but I don't think it's easier to lose body weight. It's very easy to spend money if you have money to spend. But all the threads about weight loss suggest that losing body weight is not an easy thing to do - simple maybe, but not easy. So if you have the money to spend, losing weight from the bike is easier than losing it from yourself.

My own bike weighs 10.5 kg, and although I expect to lose a kilogram or two from myself over the summer, there isn't much more to come off. So the obvious place to look for weight savings is the bike, and that might be something I would do and would expect to see a difference from if I were to compete in hill climbs, for example.

Cleat Eastwood

Its a bit of a holy grail the bikeweight thing. I bought an old dura ace crankset which weighed exactly the same as the 105 cranks I had on the bike. What I found made a difference, just to the weight of the bike as I lifted it (so it may have been psychological) - was changing the cassette and rear mech to ultegras - it just felt a tad lighter.

luv_shimano

A couple of people in this thread have mentioned tubes? Come on what are we talking 5-10 grams?

I guess a smaller valve will also shed an extra 2 grams as well

keef66

Well I've gone and stuck a bloody great Brooks B17 special on my supposedly lightweight bike. Apart from the armchair like comfort, I can't tell the difference.

Lovely it is; polished honey leather, huge beaten copper rivets and copper plated rails.

It's even got bag loops! I keep browsing for Carradice saddle bags. I may have to grow a beard and get some SPD sandals.

EarlyGo

luv_shimano,

I see what you're saying but you can save about 50g per tube between ultralites and puncture resistant tubes. By comparison, if you were to upgrade your wheels from a pair that were say 1600g to a pair that were 1500g it would end up costing you hundreds. With tubes you get the same weight saving for less than 20quid. If you view it that way it makes more sense ... perhaps?! Also if you do the same thing with your tyres you can save 300g quite easily for a cost of only say 70 quid, it's just a cheap way to make weight savings that in the end add up to a noticeable amount. You are better off just going on a diet though!

Regards, EarlyGo

Wirral_paul

luv_shimano wrote:

A couple of people in this thread have mentioned tubes? Come on what are we talking 5-10 grams?

I guess a smaller valve will also shed an extra 2 grams as well

Probably more like 50g per wheel if upgrading from a basic inner tube to a lightweight one.......... and rotating weight right at the outside circumference of the wheel where it makes more difference than at any other point on the bike. For the sake of about £5 per tube rather than £3, well worth doing to be honest when buying new tubes anyway.

Plenty say lose weight off yourself - quite right too, and i want to lose 12kg over the next few months. Doesnt stop me wanting to lose weight off my bikes too though - do both.

Upgrades makes me happy - dont need more justification than that really!!

knownothingbozo

One of the best ways to lose weight is to exercise more - for many the exercise of choice will be the bike. However one of the best ways of making sure you do the exercise on your bike is to love it, and want to go out on it. That's one of the best reasons IMHO to tinker and fettle to make it the bike you really want to spend your hours on.
I do wonder though why the pros aren't riding 10kg bikes? There must be something in this weight saving lark?

Bordersroadie

It always puzzles me that the "lose bodyweight" argument seems to suggest it's mutually exclusive from losing bike weight, but surely

"x" kg lost from bodyweight plus
1kg lost from the bike

is theoretically more beneficial than

"x" kg lost from bodyweight.

Surely this is the whole weight weenie argument?

A separate, and more telling, discussion is "how much additional energy is expended by having a bike "x" kilos more than another?" . This subject is addressed in some fascinating detail in Wikipaedia.

Bordersroadie

To answer the question: seat and seatpost.

I'm losing a third of a kilo vs OEM kit with a Thomson (alloy) post and Specialized Romin pro saddle. That's quite a lot of extra malt loaf I can carry for nowt.

keef66

knownothingbozo wrote:

One of the best ways to lose weight is to exercise more - for many the exercise of choice will be the bike. However one of the best ways of making sure you do the exercise on your bike is to love it, and want to go out on it. That's one of the best reasons IMHO to tinker and fettle to make it the bike you really want to spend your hours on.
I do wonder though why the pros aren't riding 10kg bikes? There must be something in this weight saving lark?

Weight saving on the bike benefits the pros because they are already down to 4% body fat. Two similar pros, one on a 10kg bike and the other down to the UCI limit, I guess the latter will have an advantage.

If you're a lard-arse, spending a shedload of cash shaving a few grams off the weight of the bike doesn't seem sensible to me. However, if you have the money and you like your cheeseburgers, go ahead!

g00se

knownothingbozo wrote:

One of the best ways to lose weight is to exercise more - for many the exercise of choice will be the bike. However one of the best ways of making sure you do the exercise on your bike is to love it, and want to go out on it. That's one of the best reasons IMHO to tinker and fettle to make it the bike you really want to spend your hours on.
I do wonder though why the pros aren't riding 10kg bikes? There must be something in this weight saving lark?

This.

If the bike's fun, nippy and not soul destroying on hills, then you're likely to ride more - and loose more bodyweight. If you've just bought some nice lightweight wheels, new carbon seatpost and a featherlight full carbon fork, then you're going to be riding it tomorrow morning, even if the forcast is freezing drizzle.

Chris James

g00se wrote:

This.

If the bike's fun, nippy and not soul destroying on hills, then you're likely to ride more - and loose more bodyweight. If you've just bought some nice lightweight wheels, new carbon seatpost and a featherlight full carbon fork, then you're going to be riding it tomorrow morning, even if the forcast is freezing drizzle.

That's a bit of a false choice though. A kilo or so won't make a bike 'soul destroying' on the hills. You could equally argue a solid heavy bike descends well. Or snapping your featherlight carbon seatpost being arse destroying.

The weight argument has been done to death on this forum.

Well finished parts (whihc are often expesnive and lightweight) look nice and give pride of ownership. A very hefty bike with slow tyres is a pig to ride. But for most people, with ordinary bikes, a 100g weight saving here and there will make no difference at all.

Pross

My bike is now virtually weightless in effect as I have lost 8kgs since mid January. The engine has got more powerful too - best upgrade I've ever made (and free!).

But after wheels (and possibly tyres / tubes) you are getting into diminishing returns. Far more gains in improving position for aerodynamics. That's not to say don't upgrade if you want to, it's always nice to have better kit with smoother gear changes etc. but it won't benefit you much.

Cool4catz

Try riding without a saddle. You'll save a fair chunk of weight off your bike and at the same time work your socks off. If you're really brave you can leave the stem in place :shock:

rake

ditch the bar tape.

Lossie Loon

At this level (Road Beginners) where we are simply keen recreational road cyclists, I can't imagine that losing grams here and there on upgrading components will make any difference of note whatsoever, so I would save your money if losing bike weight is your only motivation. If you are upgrading components because you want better quality, then fine, but the weight issue is neglible for guys like us.

ilm_zero7

I find putting on a pair of lycra bib shorts, and upper body layers induces instant weight loss, and the urge to have a dump, normally just before you are due to exit the door, and therefore be late - maybe the more inconvenient it is induces a greater urgency, but ignore at your peril - is this a Pavlov's Dogs type reaction?

Hoopdriver

Bordersroadie wrote:

It always puzzles me that the "lose bodyweight" argument seems to suggest it's mutually exclusive from losing bike weight, but surely

"x" kg lost from bodyweight plus
1kg lost from the bike

is theoretically more beneficial than

"x" kg lost from bodyweight.

Surely this is the whole weight weenie argument?

A separate, and more telling, discussion is "how much additional energy is expended by having a bike "x" kilos more than another?" . This subject is addressed in some fascinating detail in Wikipaedia.

It is simple really - a typical person could probably lose a stone without too much trouble. Shaving the equivalent stone - or fourteen pounds - off a bicycle would leave you carrying around what? A set of handlebars and a saddle? It is much, much simpler and cheaper and far more effective to shed weight off the rider than it is to shed weight off the bike. Not only will shedding weight off the rider result in the entire bike-rider package being lighter (and it is the whole package that matters, not just the bike) but the engine that is powering said package (you) has been considerably tuned up. A happier result all around.