Looking at getting Planet x N2a.. however just saw that frame weight is 1200 grams.. is this a problem maybe for hills or other ?
Interesting - on one page they claim the weight of a large frame to be 950g, on another the weight of a medium to be 1240g. It may be that the second weight is inclusive of the seatpost (though that seems a little heavy) or the forks (though that seems light!). Either way, if they're claiming that their SRAM red build is 7.0kg, you're looking at a very light bike indeed. You wouldn't need to worry for a moment about it holding you back on the hills.
I wouldn't worry too much about 200g, just offset it by removing some unnecessary weight elsewhere.
If you're going uphill you're not going to need brakes, removing those will save some weight. You'll probably be out of your saddle a lot (you'll need to be with such a heavy frame), so you might as well lose that too.
Actually, there aren't all that many frames (other than the really high-end cannondale super evos, Cervelo S5s etc) that weight very much less than 1200 in reality (as opposed to in the catalogues) once you include paint, derailleur hanger, cable stops, bottom bracket shells etc etc... You can still easily build a sub 6.8kg bike with a frame of that weight with careful selection of components. Also, until you pay silly money a really light frame is likely not to be very stiff. In the price range you are looking at you will gain more from a bit of extra stiffness than you will from saving 200g.
you can spend £1000s trying to get a lighter frame as neeb has mention , in reality light is not always better, in my experience the way the frame feels on decents and when pushing it on the flat is wear it counts stiff but comfy ,hard to find but much more important than 200g. i wouldnt worry so much about it to much cause if your like me things on your bike will change at an alarming rate once you start riding alot , in that i mean parts (ooooooooooh that seats 30g lighter gotta have it )
My frame weighs 1310g, but the bike is under 7.5kg w/ midrange components. As Neeb says, getting the bike lighter is easy enough. It's your legs and gearing that will have more impact on climbing than the frame weight.
I dont think any Colnago frames weigh less than 1200 g as they don't believe in making frames that are too light. I have a steel framed bike that weighs 8 kg and the frame weighs 1800 g, Ive had no complaints from the hills so far.
Posts
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.
http://100hillsforgeorge.blogspot.com/
http://www.12on12in12.blogspot.co.uk/
Why would the hills care what frame you're using? :P
Lol...
Interesting - on one page they claim the weight of a large frame to be 950g, on another the weight of a medium to be 1240g. It may be that the second weight is inclusive of the seatpost (though that seems a little heavy) or the forks (though that seems light!). Either way, if they're claiming that their SRAM red build is 7.0kg, you're looking at a very light bike indeed. You wouldn't need to worry for a moment about it holding you back on the hills.
If you're going uphill you're not going to need brakes, removing those will save some weight. You'll probably be out of your saddle a lot (you'll need to be with such a heavy frame), so you might as well lose that too.
Problem solved.
Nice deep tubes too so all the power seems to go towards speed - nothings wasted.
What do you ride ?
Chapeau Sir!
Colnago
Cervelo
Campagnolo