Mtb factories please show the weights of your bikes

rockmonkeysc

UncleMonty wrote:

I agree with the OP as well, it just seems stupid to me.

I'm not bothered about the head angle, top tube length or BB clearance, I find these measuments useless until you actualy sit on a bike, but it doesnt stop the manufacurers listing these and many more for every different frame size, why go to all this trouble and then leave out the weight ?

So the measurements which affect how a bike rides and cannot be altered are less important than the weight which can be reduced significantly in some cases with just a change of tyres?

UncleMonty

RockmonkeySC wrote:

UncleMonty wrote:

I agree with the OP as well, it just seems stupid to me.

I'm not bothered about the head angle, top tube length or BB clearance, I find these measuments useless until you actualy sit on a bike, but it doesnt stop the manufacurers listing these and many more for every different frame size, why go to all this trouble and then leave out the weight ?

So the measurements which affect how a bike rides and cannot be altered are less important than the weight which can be reduced significantly in some cases with just a change of tyres?

I don't understand what a different tyre has to do with anything ?

They show a photo / list the spec for the whole bike, this is what you pay for - this is what you get, they confirm the weight for that spec, or, an approx weight (I believe in the UK the word "approximate" allows a tollerance of + or - 5%). They add a caviat to say the weight is for that spec only and that the spec is subject to change.

Lets face it weight is important with bikes, they make a big deal about how lightweight the bike is without backing it up, you can search the gross weight for any car a the click of a mouse, I just don't understand why the bike industry is any different.

rockmonkeysc

A lot of bikes come with cheap, wire bead tyres because manufacturers know most people will replace them with tyres to suit their local trails. Changing a tyre can loose a good amount of weight and rotating weight makes a much bigger difference than the same amount of weight off the frame.

Kowalski675

danlightbulb wrote:

Would most of you buy a car without knowing its power output / power to weight ratio?

Only a small minority of car buyers will ever look at those figures when buying a car - the vast majority are more interested in what colour it is, what it looks like and what gadgets and goodies it has. Ask the average person in the street and they won't have a clue what power or torque their car puts out, much less what it weighs.

bails87

Kowalski675 wrote:

danlightbulb wrote:

Would most of you buy a car without knowing its power output / power to weight ratio?

Only a small minority of car buyers will ever look at those figures when buying a car - the vast majority are more interested in what colour it is, what it looks like and what gadgets and goodies it has. Ask the average person in the street and they won't have a clue what power or torque their car puts out, much less what it weighs.

And if one car weighs a few kg more than another that's rarely enough to put a buyer off.

But imagine what the average customer/idiot would think when seeing:
Bike A - 29.8lbs
Bike B - 30.0 lbs

Errmehgawd, bike B is a whole pound heavier, I'm not buying that.

Except Bike A was a 14" frame (marked up as a "large"*), measured with 'too short' cables & chain, a seatpost that's too short to allow any adjustment, minimal fluid in the forks, paperthin tubes, virtually slick tyres and all the paint scraped off the side of the frame you can't see in the photo.

*

Competitive pressures have often led to inaccuracy in width measurement. Here's how it works: Suppose you are in the market for a high performance 700 x 25 tire; you might reasonably investigate catalogues and advertisements to try to find the lightest 700-25 available. If the Pepsi Tire Company and the Coke Tire Company had tires of equal quality and technology, but the Pepsi 700-25 was actually a 700-24 marked as a 25, the Pepsi tire would be lighter than the accurately-marked Coke 700-25. This would put them at a competitive advantage. In self defense, Coke would retaliate by marketing an even lighter 700-23 labeled as a 700-25

http://sheldonbrown.com/tire-sizing.html#dishonest

lbalony

janellesgaard wrote:

Hi am I the only one missing weight specification of mountain bikes on tech specs sheet from the factories ?
The have loads of geometry numbers, but almost anyone shows what their bikes weight.

Like this page if you agree
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Show-the-weight-specs-on-Mountainbikes/211134348965814?id=211134348965814&sk=info

I agree and those who are taking the mickey should stop as 11 people since 2011 is some good going on your manufacturer witch hunt! Do you have a MySpace page I can like, i have not made the move to that Faceplant yet!

I really want to know all weights of all sizes and models. We need more specs. Also it would be good to get weight estimates if you put new grips and pedals on.

Also because I ride at different heights and altitudes is there sone sort of gravitational force spec we could campain for? If i had have checked my weight before buying my bike I would not have bought it. Its 12.1kg but toys r us do one for 12kg. And it was 2400 cheaper.

coursemyhorse

Personally I find it annoying as well. You wouldn't buy a 20kg full sus bike, because it weighs 20kg. How do we know the latest 2k specialized full suss AM bike does not weigh this? Of course weight is important. I'll give you a standard, weigh the complete bike on a scale. Define complete? A bike you can get on and ride a trail with immediately, fully setup. It's not hard, put the bike on a scale and publish the weight.
Why do people say things like "with or without pedals".... err...with, in that you need them. That to me may as well say, oh ok but with or without wheels?

A bike has a spec or a possible few specs depending on options, publish a weight for each. If the combination of options is too high then do a combined weight of a common option spec, so we can at least get a ball park.

supersonic

The retailers should weight the bikes (as well). They are selling us the things.

njee20

Why do people say things like "with or without pedals".... err...with, in that you need them

Again, which pedals?

DMR V8s - 524g
Egg Beater 11 - 177g

That's well over half a pound on a pair of pedals. What is the standard?

If the combination of options is too high then do a combined weight of a common option spec, so we can at least get a ball park.

Again, what is acceptable for a 'ball park'? To the nearest kilo? The mean of the different specs? Verified by whom? Surely a ball park will just render any comparisons useless, as virtually all comparable bikes will fall within exactly the same ball park.

rockmonkeysc

If they can't even get wheel sizes right, how are they going to get weights right?

coursemyhorse

njee20 wrote:

Why do people say things like "with or without pedals".... err...with, in that you need them

Again, which pedals?

DMR V8s - 524g
Egg Beater 11 - 177g

That's well over half a pound on a pair of pedals. What is the standard?

If the combination of options is too high then do a combined weight of a common option spec, so we can at least get a ball park.

Again, what is acceptable for a 'ball park'? To the nearest kilo? The mean of the different specs? Verified by whom? Surely a ball park will just render any comparisons useless, as virtually all comparable bikes will fall within exactly the same ball park.

Why do we care which pedals? Put some on and give us a bike weight total. For all I care, put some V8's on. As long as they are included in the spec, then we know how much bike X weighs including V8 pedals. If we want to compare to another bike, we can do easily even if the other bike has different pedals, because we find out the weight of the pedals on the internet. Frankly, specify the weight of everything where possible. It's not hard is it. Specialized know how much all of their components weigh if they care. Of course they do. So why not list in the spec the frame weight and the wheel weight etc as well. Pure laziness and the fact they do not want to appear inferior to someone else. Just list them.

As for the "acceptable ball park", I think you missed the point? To the nearest kilo you ask? Err no, to the nearest gram perferably. Just use a bloomin set of good/calibrated scales. I'm sure most manufacturers of MTB gear can afford a set. Verified? Why do they need to be verified. You weigh something, and the scales give you a weight. They are verified by yourself, weighing something to the best (truthfullness) of your ability.
I meant that if the gear can vary per bike build, (i.e. different wheel set or something) then just give us the weight of both, or just with one set and specify which set was used. Nothing more or less. You are over complicating it.

coursemyhorse

RockmonkeySC wrote:

Theres no point unless there is an international standard to say how they are weighed.
Most weights which are published are calculated from the claimed weights of components and a calculated weight of the frame. The end result is a meaningless figure which could be way off the actual weight of the bike you get in the showroom.

I know it's a hard concept to imagine but stay with me, you get your bike, and you weigh it, then write the weight down. Hard I know.

lbalony

nicklouse wrote:

danlightbulb wrote:

I agree with the OP.

It doesn't matter so much if the weight published is spot on to the gram or not, but even a ballpark figure would be nice to have. Yes components vary, but for god sake Mr bike manufacturer you are shipping out a complete bike just tell me roughly how much it weighs. Is it 12kg, 14kg, 16kg? This kind of range does matter. If its 12kg or 12.2kg, then it doesn't matter to most people.

but then you will get some yank sueing the bike people as the weight was not correct due to all the suppliers hitting the max tolerances for the parts fitted.

again if weight is so important take scales with you.

One guy on here the other month was wanting to Sue Canyon of he's head angle being 1' out! If weight should just be ball park make and educated guess! If people stop buying bikes due to not having a stated weight im sure they'll do something about it. But while 99% of mtb'ers ain't bothered I'm not sure they will.

rockmonkeysc

I don't care what the actual weight us. I don't know the weight of any of my bikes. If I pick up a bike in a shop and think "thats a bit heavy" then I would maybe consider looking elsewhere. Total weight is a bit meaningless anyway. A 30lb bike with ultra light wheels will feel lighter to ride than a 25lb bike with mega heavy wheels.
I used to have a 28lb hardtail with Sun Ringle Double Track rims and dual ply tyres, you wouldn't want to ride that bugger up hills.

njee20

If we want to compare to another bike, we can do easily even if the other bike has different pedals, because we find out the weight of the pedals on the internet.

What if you don't know what the pedals are that it's weighed with? Why not just find out the weight of the bike if you're looking things up on the internet?

The Rookie

RockmonkeySC wrote:

The comparison with car power output figures is quite a good one. Some are measured at the wheel. Some are measured at the crankshaft. Some are measured at the gearbox.

All type approved cars (aka any on general sale) are tested to international standards, none of them being at the wheel or gearbox, all are corrected to a standard temperature and pressure, all use a standard test fuel.

Why post guesswork? But then not having the first clue about what you are talking never stopped you before!

njee20

Play nicely children.