Weighed my bike today.

widge34

Have changed a lot of things on my bike since I purchased it last October, so I thought I would weigh it today. It came in at 31lbs. Is that a reasonable weight for a full suss bike? Eventually it will have a new Wheelset which will get it down to 30lbs or just under.

weescott

31lbs is perfectly reasonable for a full sus trail bike.

IBISMojoHDamon

My Ibis is 31.01 too.... I thought it would be lighter to be honest being carbon an all, but it is 160mm front and rear with a Reverb, Chain device and bash...

widge34

Apart from changing the wheels, there is not a lot more I can do to lighten bike without it costing a fortune. Will be happy now with a 30lb bike though.

leaflite

Whats the finishing kit like? Possibly some weight to be saved there. Also, a 1x9/10 conversion would help drop the weight a little.
The titus weighs in at 27lbs dead on with a reverb and 1x10 conversion (partial-using the front mech as a kind of chainguide with limit screws fully in + have kept the chainrings on so it is easy to change back) without using any silly light/expensive parts and a fairly cheap wheelset.

Anonymous

My alloy Nomad comes in at 30lbs which seems reasonable for what it does. Lifted up a carbon version and wasn't much lighter. Wouldn't worry unless you are lycra obsessed.

widge34

leaflite wrote:

Whats the finishing kit like? Possibly some weight to be saved there. Also, a 1x9/10 conversion would help drop the weight a little.
The titus weighs in at 27lbs dead on with a reverb and 1x10 conversion (partial-using the front mech as a kind of chainguide with limit screws fully in + have kept the chainrings on so it is easy to change back) without using any silly light/expensive parts and a fairly cheap wheelset.

Running a 1x9 set up with a nice and light Renthal front ring. I am using a Superstar chain guide but that isn't overly heavy. SRAM x9 rear mech short gauge, x9 shifter, new Shimano XT brakes with Icetec rotors, Renthal duo stem, Nukeproof Warhead 760mm bar, on one seat post and Specialised Henge saddle. The wheels are WTB All mountain Speed discs.

widge34

leaflite wrote:

Whats the finishing kit like? Possibly some weight to be saved there. Also, a 1x9/10 conversion would help drop the weight a little.
The titus weighs in at 27lbs dead on with a reverb and 1x10 conversion (partial-using the front mech as a kind of chainguide with limit screws fully in + have kept the chainrings on so it is easy to change back) without using any silly light/expensive parts and a fairly cheap wheelset.

Running a 1x9 set up with a nice and light Renthal front ring. I am using a Superstar chain guide but that isn't overly heavy. SRAM x9 rear mech short gauge, x9 shifter, new Shimano XT brakes with Icetec rotors, Renthal duo stem, Nukeproof Warhead 760mm bar, on one seat post and Specialised Henge saddle. The wheels are WTB All mountain Speed discs.

1mancity2

deadkenny wrote:

My alloy Nomad comes in at 30lbs which seems reasonable for what it does. Lifted up a carbon version and wasn't much lighter. Wouldn't worry unless you are lycra obsessed.

Totally agree

ricardo_smooth

My XL nomad weighs in at 32lb, so decent tbh

snotty badger

Weighed my Pitch the other day - 30.6lbs still running 2x9 wth a bash and flats, quite happy with that.

Wouldn't be hard to get under 30lb but I'm happy with it as it is, I don't think it would add to my riding enjoyment!

toasty

Quite light frames on the Pitch, especially given what silliness people get up to on them. No idea why I got rid of mine.

njee20

My Top Fuel is 20lbs :-D

In the lycra brigade though, I'm not fat, and it's more comfy!

There will be places to save chunks of weigh (ie everywhere) but if you're happy to spend that money and/or potentially compromise functionality is something else.

lawman

I'm stupidly weight conscious, but am in no way a lycra fanboy. just because I like a light bike doesnt mean i am. the HD weighs 25.9lbs with 1 x10 and full chainguide, reverb, havoc carbon bars, tubeless nobby nics and light wheels, so its a pretty hardcore trail setup, but still plenty light enough to chuck about and climbs like a mountain goat on speed, well it does when I'm feeling fit

the HT is just under 23lbs, similar setup to the HD although not quite as blingy, mostly superstar stuff bu its still a damn light bike considering its got 140mm forks in it!

would love a 150ish mm FS bike that weighed even less than the HD, the frame in all honesty is overbuilt for me, but I love the geometry and it fits really well

benpinnick

My blur is 27.2 Lbs at the moment. I am considering a swap to a carbon FS and Revelation World Cups that should drop it to around 25 Lbs. Which I would be happy with for a 140/150 FS.

The Frankencube HT is 22lbs. Not bad for a bike I built from a £650 purchase bike as a donor for the frame (stripped and sold the parts) and bits lying around my garage, + some SIDs from Germany.

njee20

would love a 150ish mm FS bike that weighed even less than the HD, the frame in all honesty is overbuilt for me, but I love the geometry and it fits really well

Mojo SL-R?

Always wanted a Mojo, not really sure why, never ridden one, would just like one!

widge34

Suppose when I get a new Wheelset I could go tubeless. That would lighten it up a bit more.

widge34

Can the Stans Crests be run tubeless?

benpinnick

They are designed to be tubeless. Needs the yellow tape on them though.

njee20

Which you can use as a rim tape anyway. Daft not to go tubeless on Crests IMO.

widge34

Do you need specific tyres to run tubeless? Haven't really looked into it before.

lawman

njee20 wrote:

would love a 150ish mm FS bike that weighed even less than the HD, the frame in all honesty is overbuilt for me, but I love the geometry and it fits really well

Mojo SL-R?

Always wanted a Mojo, not really sure why, never ridden one, would just like one!

like alot of bikes in this category atm, its flawed in so may areas. its mega steep geometry wise, it has a pressfit bb and no iscg tabs so you can't mount a full guide... the angles can be got around with an angleset, buts its too much hassle imo. there are all of 3 bikes out there atm which I would think would fit the bill, sb66c, mojo HD and whyte 146, would add the bmc tested in this months mbr but it has clearance issues...

toasty

If you intended to run longer forks, Carbon Nomads are a bit lighter than Mojo HDs, same with shorter forks and Blur LTCs, obviously neither are as diverse tho

New Stumpjumper Evo carbons have nice light frames somewhere in the middle travel wise.

Edit: I'd also love to highlight that the Orange Five frames are longer, just as slack, can run 140/160 forks and only about half a pound max heavier than the Mojo HD, but that crowd with pitch forks are looking at me funnily.

1mancity2

Toasty wrote:

If you intended to run longer forks, Carbon Nomads are a bit lighter than Mojo HDs, same with shorter forks and Blur LTCs, obviously neither are as diverse tho

New Stumpjumper Evo carbons have nice light frames somewhere in the middle travel wise.

Edit: I'd also love to highlight that the Orange Five frames are longer, just as slack, can run 140/160 forks and only about half a pound max heavier than the Mojo HD, but that crowd with pitch forks are looking at me funnily.

Fixed for you Toasty

Anonymous

widge34 wrote:

Do you need specific tyres to run tubeless? Haven't really looked into it before.

Some regular tubes work well tubeless, some don't and depends on the rim and tyre size I think (obviously having a tubeless ready or converted rim).

You can get specific tubeless tyres. They can weigh more than a standard folding tyre though but on the other hand you have no tube so works out roughly the same. If you can get a standard folding tube to work tubeless then that will probably be the best for weight saving.

bennett_346

Well my 150mm trail bike weighs 28lbs rounded up, but my pitch used to weigh a good 31lbs and i don't notice much difference, except when lifting it over fences and onto racks etc. It's a bit nicer to ride when you get to 30+ miles in a day but that's probably more due to the other things like the angles and lockout.

lawman

1mancity2 wrote:

Toasty wrote:

If you intended to run longer forks, Carbon Nomads are a bit lighter than Mojo HDs, same with shorter forks and Blur LTCs, obviously neither are as diverse tho

New Stumpjumper Evo carbons have nice light frames somewhere in the middle travel wise.

Edit: I'd also love to highlight that the Orange Five frames are longer, just as slack, can run 140/160 forks and only about half a pound max heavier than the Mojo HD, but that crowd with pitch forks are looking at me funnily.

Fixed for you Toasty

the 5 is no way only half a pound heavier! my medium HD is 2.7kgs with shock, the Five afaik in the same size is circa 3.1/3.2kgs so its a full pound heavier in fact, and even with the maxle its flexy as hell, pig ugly, over priced and common as muck...

toasty

lawman wrote:

the 5 is no way only half a pound heavier! my medium HD is 2.7kgs with shock, the Five afaik in the same size is circa 3.1/3.2kgs so its a full pound heavier in fact, and even with the maxle its flexy as hell, pig ugly, over priced and common as muck...

Congratulations are in order then, yours is 200 grams lighter than the claimed weight!

http://www.ibiscycles.co.uk/bikes/mojo_hd/

Weight for the frame and shock, size medium, matte finish: 6.5 lbs, 2.93Kg (~.1 lb difference between sizes and for painted frame)

http://forums.mtbr.com/ibis/mojo-hd-real-frame-weight-772844.html

The claimed weight for both is 6.5lbs, I was being generous assuming the Orange was lying, and Ibis was being accurate (even though my Ibis was almost a pound over the claimed weight).

I love how that argument just broke down mid way through into a desperate dig at them being flexy, expensive and ugly.

lawman wrote:

so its a full pound heavier in fact.

Well, not "fact", "blind guess" would have been more accurate. I can give better info tomorrow, XL Five frame is due.

lawman

Toasty wrote:

lawman wrote:

the 5 is no way only half a pound heavier! my medium HD is 2.7kgs with shock, the Five afaik in the same size is circa 3.1/3.2kgs so its a full pound heavier in fact, and even with the maxle its flexy as hell, pig ugly, over priced and common as muck...

Congratulations are in order then, yours is 200 grams lighter than the claimed weight!

http://www.ibiscycles.co.uk/bikes/mojo_hd/

Weight for the frame and shock, size medium, matte finish: 6.5 lbs, 2.93Kg (~.1 lb difference between sizes and for painted frame)

http://forums.mtbr.com/ibis/mojo-hd-real-frame-weight-772844.html

The claimed weight for both is 6.5lbs, I was being generous assuming the Orange was lying, and Ibis was being accurate (even though my Ibis was almost a pound over the claimed weight).

I love how that argument just broke down mid way through into a desperate dig at them being flexy, expensive and ugly.

lawman wrote:

so its a full pound heavier in fact.

Well, not fact, in blind guess would have been more accurate. I can give better info tomorrow, XL Five frame is due.

I know what it weighed because I weighed it! it was fresh out of the box, including chainstay protector, seat clamp, shock and all mounting harware, no maxle included. should also point out mine is a HD140 which has a smaller shock, claimed weight is 6.45lbs, but there are always differences, +/- 0.1lb is quite common on frames, such is the way the frames are made up, my havoc crabon bars were 242g, claimed was 235g, my haven stem was 140g claimed is 145g, you can never go the claimed weight, and even the numbers put around are sometimes of the mark... but I can sure you it was 2.7kgs give or take 50g

toasty

lawman wrote:

claimed weight is 6.45lbs, but there are always differences, +/- 0.1lb is quite common on frames, such is the way the frames are made up

Or +/- 0.5lbs in your case. Not that I doubt your scales. That thread I linked is good, even the sicklines one is >3kg, infact EVERY one I've seen is over the claimed weight, except for yours which undershoots it by a huge margin.

such is the way the frames are made up

Top choice of words.

Edit: Oh and has it got lighter? Is there a bit missing? It was 150g heavier when you bought it and posted the weight in the original post. Still lighter than claimed, think it might be new scales time, those ones might be good for muffins, don't seem fantastic for bikes.

lawman wrote:

for those who might be interested btw, the frame weighs 2.83Kg for a medium without the maxle lite

lawman

Toasty wrote:

lawman wrote:

claimed weight is 6.45lbs, but there are always differences, +/- 0.1lb is quite common on frames, such is the way the frames are made up

Or +/- 0.5lbs in your case. Not that I doubt your scales. That thread I linked is good, even the sicklines one is >3kg, infact EVERY one I've seen is over the claimed weight, except for yours which undershoots it by a huge margin.

such is the way the frames are made up

Top choice of words.

Edit: Oh and has it got lighter? Is there a bit missing? It was 150g heavier when you bought it and posted the weight in the original post. Still lighter than claimed, think it might be new scales time, those ones might be good for muffins, don't seem fantastic for bikes.

lawman wrote:

for those who might be interested btw, the frame weighs 2.83Kg for a medium without the maxle lite

well corrected toasty, I didn't bother looking at the thread, but yes i see the error of my ways. It was off the top of my head, but yes as the thread says it was 2.83kg. there really is no need to be so matter of fact though, its just a mistake, jeez man!! A +/- 0.1lb discrepancy at 2.83kg would mean its just under 6.36lbs or so, which by your own logic is perfectly reasonable. Regardless of what you say, the facts are there... the 5 is heavier, many feel it is over-priced it is over-priced for what it is, once you add the equivilant options to the 5, maxle, kashima rp23, seat clamp and a decent colour, its £1716, which for a simple frame is a lot of cash considering this. I have nothing against owners of the 5, but the bike itself is nothing to write home about imo.