Cheapest way to get a 6.8kg race bike

bendertherobot

All things are rarely equal. There are various stats knocking round. Apparently a 50 minute climb of alp takes 51 minutes if the bike is 4 pounds heavier. That's a generalisation. But a difference of a mere pound or so is unlikely to see significant losses

markhewitt1978

bendertherobot wrote:

All things are rarely equal. There are various stats knocking round. Apparently a 50 minute climb of alp takes 51 minutes if the bike is 4 pounds heavier. That's a generalisation. But a difference of a mere pound or so is unlikely to see significant losses

But the statement was it won't make you any quicker. Using that example a difference of a minute during a race is huge.

bendertherobot

On a race up the alp yes.

Grill

BigMat wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

BigMat wrote:

Use tubs I guess. My bike is 7.2kg and that's with a fairly heavy frameset. If I swapped that for even something like a Planet X SL Pro it would be close to 6.8. Some light weight tubs and it'd be well under.

Elsewhere on here someone added the numbers up and the difference between tubs and clinchers wasn't much. The tubular tyres weighed more than the clinchers and if you account for three tubulars on the bike against two clincher tyres and three tubes, the clincher option actually came out lighter. Though of course, the clincher had heavier rims (but that's a whole different argument!).

Obviously, the bike weight doesn't include the spare tubular but in practical terms it doesn't appear to be an honest weight saving!

I'm aiming to save another 200g by getting some very light alloy clinchers (mid 1300s as opposed to mid 1500s for the current wheelset. I don't think tubulars would gain me much though open to suggestion!

Forget spare tubes, spare tyres etc, this is about what the bike weighs which is the only concern for many disciplines - TT, hill climb, crit race, hell even a road race I don't bother carrying spares as you don't exactly have time to change a tyre. A tub wheel is lighter than the equivalent clincher as far as I'm aware and would be a relatively easy way to save a couple of hundred grams on a bike build.

Weight is not important on TTs.

graham_g

A top quality old alu frameset for starters - something like a Principia, Bianchi, from late 90's before carbon totally took over the peloton. Can often pick them up for bobbins, then use older kit that's pretty light - anything like chorus or record from the 2000's, with the exception of the crankset/BB which needs something more modern & lightweight than the square taper stuff. After that, any OK set of sprints will see that lot right. Honestly, just look at some of the bikes in your local hill climbs, nothing special by appearance but down to sub 6kg here and there, it can be done for bobbins. The suggestion of a Canyon for £3k as a 'cheap' option is utterly ludicrous considering weight weenieing is nothing new so there's loads of old, lightweight kit out there (e.g. I sold some 3t bars, 26.0 clamp mind, for a tenner weighing just 197g - they must have been 10 years old).

700c

GGBiker wrote:

tomb2100 wrote:

Be cheaper to lose weight

Well someone had to say it !!

Yes but I might die as body fat is only 3%

If that's the case then I suggest you stop riding and get yourself checked into hospital, if the grams we're talking here mean life or death!

In all seriousness, I guess you've got your answer - most seem to suggest anything carbon by Canyon!

At the risk of being controversial, I'd agree with those suggesting to lose weight from wheels first (and tubs are ean effective way to do this) , if further loss is required to meet your weight target

Oh and PS my apologies for not reading your original post first time when I replied!

GGBiker

Thanks, saw a great Canyon SLX at an event a few days ago, looked fantastic and is available from around 2k.

Re losing weight from the wheels first, does this make climbing faster?

[joke]

domgears

trek_dan wrote:

Buy second hand. My Dolan Hercules SL is 7.3kg all in including pedals, K-edge, bottle mounts etc. and I built that for £1300. Frameset was second hand off classifieds on here, wheels off Ebay, groupset a mix of second hand old style Dura-Ace and sale Ultegra. Could easily get that sub 7kg spending a few more £££'s or if I went tubs.

This
I bought a 2010 Cervelo R3sl last year, only had 1 year of moderate use (seller had an injury) so apart from the usual small paint chips on the forks it is in excellent condition

cost me $4000 SGD (2000 GBP) Full DA 7900, Zipp 303 clinchers, Speedplay Zero TI pedals, Ritchey Carbon Stem & Bars etc. etc.

Entire bike 6.8kg (inc pedals)

P.S. The guy gave me all the original receipts, I got $13,000 (6500 GBP)of bike for $4000 (2000 GBP)

antfly

Your exchange rates are a bit off, 4000 dollars is 2500 quid FWIW.

philbar72

don't go mad on the groupset. 105 is perfectly good enough for racing and if you shop around can be got hold of for £ 400 ish. wheels, if you don't want tubs the best bang for buck are probably ar30's they are light (around 1400g) and placebo aero (30mm alloy). think they are £350 ish at the moment.

bar and saddles are easy to get light weight and if you have a racing license you can go for a canyon frameset for a significant discount.

racingcondor

I suspect there are a few like the Canyon and Dolan that you can buy at a very light weight but building yourself I'd start with a Planet X frame and wheels with Force (Red is a bit lighter but a lot more £).

Don't underestimate the benefit of picking the right seatpost, saddle cables, brakes (P-X again) and bar tape, there's an easy 200g to be made there against bog standard versions. Oh and SpeedPlays to get the pedal weight off the bike.

My 5 year old Condor Leggero is 7.3kg and I haven't bought anything for lightness (DA hubs, metal rims, Force and the always heavier than advertised Deda finishing kit). I bought for things that work and suit the asthetic and only weighed it this year because it came up in a conversation.

Only other questions is, why stop at 6.8? 6.5 would be easy enough.

domgears

antfly wrote:

Your exchange rates are a bit off, 4000 dollars is 2500 quid FWIW.

You are confusing your dollars, I referred to SGD, Singapore dollars which are 2:1

napoleond

Frame-
Ribble 7005 ultra lite frame with light fork such as Deda black fin
Planet X rt57 f+f
Sab Lampedusa (from Planet X)

Rest-
2nd hand SRAM red group with Recon cassette and kmc chain, Planet X Cnc brakes (or zero gravity if you can get some). Change the red chainrings for strong light ct2
2nd hand bontrager xxx lite finishing kit or similar
Speedplay zero Cro mo pedals with eBay titanium spindle.
Chinese carbon saddle or 2nd hand selle italia carbon jobbie.
2nd hand wheels (some Mavic CCUs went for less than a grand on here recently)
Vittoria open Corsa tubs

Cheap (except wheels) and very light race bike.

Grill

Keep in mind if you buy a Recon cassette you'll be changing it every 1000 miles. Terrible vfm.

rolf_f

NapoleonD wrote:

Speedplay zero Cro mo pedals with eBay titanium spindle.

Presume you are accounting for cleat weight - cos there's no point pretending your bike weighs just under 6.8 when the only way you got there was by sticking concrete cleats to your shoes!

Grill

Indeed. Can't really get much lighter than the Time Xpresso 12 when all is taken into account.

imposter2.0

To the OP - if you firmly believe that having a lighter bike will improve your results, then go for it. Gains in fitness will be cheaper and far more effective though...

napoleond

Rolf F wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

Speedplay zero Cro mo pedals with eBay titanium spindle.

Presume you are accounting for cleat weight - cos there's no point pretending your bike weighs just under 6.8 when the only way you got there was by sticking concrete cleats to your shoes!

Guy was asking for the lightest bike, not bike/rider combo.

napoleond

Grill wrote:

Keep in mind if you buy a Recon cassette you'll be changing it every 1000 miles. Terrible vfm.

The op was asking how to make a light bike cheap. Strong / light / cheap - pick two...

cycleclinic

I will describe my Trek (which has since changed now and got heavier) to give you an idea.

1992 Trek as of summer this year was 7.57kg - not 6.8kg but as you will see If you start with a modern frame then sub 6.8kg is easy.
Trek 2300/alloy forks 105 threaded headset -2.3kg second hand £180 and it came with other bits
Cinelli grammo quill stem 180g - £40 of ebay
Ritchey Logic pro bars -250g
Cinelli cork tape 50g
Modolo Resin brake levers -243g - ebay £24 NOS from hungary
KCNC CB1 brakes -170g front and rear - a bit flexy but they work if you pull the lever hard enough. Bought of weight weenies for 100 euro's
DA-7800 53/39T with ultegra BB about 760g - cost less £40 as it was ebay bargin with the wrong outer ring (46T). With a new outer ring and new BB the total cost was a bit £100.
Ultegra 6600 rear mech with alloy bolts - £25 of ebay + some money for bolts from toronto cycles. I got this mech down to 185g.
DA 9 speed 12-21T cassette of ebay s/h. It did 2000 miles and I changed it for 10 speed 12-23T. nothing wrong with the 9 speed cassette just fancied a change.
D/T shifters - 80g
Thomson seatpost with ti bolts -180g as I cut it down
Sella Italia sLR XP saddle - 180g
Pedals old look arc's -330g
Wheels cost me less not alot to build up (certainly not £1000). Kinlin XR-200 rims, Sapim Laser spokes, alloy nipples Novatec hubs 1360g and 3000 miles later they are fine however I should sell them as I have new wheels now.
Conti GP4000s tyres, Race 28 supersonic tubs - 520g in total.
Veloplugs saves a bit of cloth tape.
I could have saved 500g of this build with just changing to threadless forks, headset, and stem and fitting some light pedals - like the NOS Look PP76 carbon pedals in purple I have just bought (216g apparantly)

If I had started with any of the frames NapolionD stated and used a Campag Chorus group and a threadless stem and bars maybe Ritchey WCS a sub 6.8kg build would result for not a vast amount.

rolf_f

NapoleonD wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

NapoleonD wrote:

Speedplay zero Cro mo pedals with eBay titanium spindle.

Presume you are accounting for cleat weight - cos there's no point pretending your bike weighs just under 6.8 when the only way you got there was by sticking concrete cleats to your shoes!

Guy was asking for the lightest bike, not bike/rider combo.

Yes - but hiding the weight by not counting the cleats is only fooling yourself. More honest (and a lot less silly) to just not include the pedals altogether in the weight than pretend the bike is lighter because there is no cleat mechanism on it.

Maybe bikes should be weighed with the shoes attached......

napoleond

But if the guy thinks that by having a light bike he will be a lot quicker he is fooling himself. It's an exercise in making a light bike! Simple!
As soon as you put someone like me on a bike it pretty much voids any gram shaving. The guy asked how to make a 6.8kg BIKE as cheap as possible... Not whether other bits would be heavier or the parts not very durable.

pkripper

buy any frame and drill holes in it. And the stem. And seatpost.

Quite how any of our mountain bikes survived back in the late 80's / early 90's when we put them on handmade diets I have no idea. But they did!

markhewitt1978

Sorry if it's a n00b question, but how is the weight measured exactly? i.e. What's included, pedals? bottle cages?

Perhaps it's more useful to measure the weight of your bike 'on road' with everything you normally carry except perhaps water.

pkripper

to me, it's the bike as it would be purchased from the shop, without pedals, as they're not usually provided as they're far more of a personal preference.

The 'functional' weight of the bike is as it would be on the road, with everything the rider needed to get through a ride of given duration / circumstance. So, my functional weight for a race would be less than for a sportive etc.

bigmat

Weight should be the weight of the bike as fit for riding. I weigh mine with 2 bottle cages, pedals, computer mount but would remove the bottles, computer (actually I don't bother but I think that would be allowed), saddle pack (if I used one - ugh!) etc. I guess bottle cages could come off if you're really anal but ask yourself what you're trying to prove? Unless you would ride the bike without them (I do actually remove mine for hill climbs / short time trials thinking about it). My best bike is around 7.4kg, built up from a relatively heavy Viner Gladius frame, reckon it would be 6.8kg if I just bought a 900g frame but at the end of the day I'm 82kg and a fairly powerful rider so shedding more weight (from the bike) not really a priority!

cycleclinic

I weigh my bike with pedals and bottle cages but nothing else. You cannot ride a bike without pedals.

rolf_f

Weighing without pedals normalises the bike weight so you can compare it to your bike - after all, if the other persons bike was yours, you'd probably be taking their pedals off and putting your own ones on.

thecycleclinic wrote:

I weigh my bike with pedals and bottle cages but nothing else. You cannot ride a bike without pedals.

But you can't weigh your bike whilst riding it!

cycleclinic

Yes but I am not comparing my bikes to others, I am comparing it to how it was before. Also as pedal differ by 200g if you make a decison on a bike based on a 200g weight difference you need you head examined. Oh wait most cyclists do me included.

rolf_f

thecycleclinic wrote:

Yes but I am not comparing my bikes to others, I am comparing it to how it was before. Also as pedal differ by 200g if you make a decison on a bike based on a 200g weight difference you need you head examined. Oh wait most cyclists do me included.

If you are only comparing your own bike to how it was before and not to the weight of others bikes (yeah, right ), unless you've changed your pedals, it makes no difference at all either way so your comment about weighing your bike with the pedals on was superfluous! And certainly I said nothing about making decisions based on pedal weight - just that if you are bothering to make weight comparisons at all, they are a lot more meaningful you eliminate the variables that don't apply to you.