8kg - thoughts

BikeAndEarly

i just finished building a Specialized Roubaix SL4 with a carbon 8r frame in Specialized-speak. The bike is fitted with a full Shimano Ultegra 6800 groupset (11-28 cassette) and Ultegra 6800 wheels with Continental Gatorskin Harshell tyres.
Over and above that it has:
1. 3T ergonova handlebars (aluminium)
2. 3T arx 100mm stem (aluminium)
3. Specialized Cobl Gobl-r seatpost
4. Specialized Body geometry saddle
5. Lizard Skins bar tape
6. 2 plastic water bottle cages (very light)

The bike came up to 8KG without pedals. I think it is decent because the wheels are not really that light and I have not gone all out (carbon) for stem, handlebars, and saddle. Also that cobl gobl-r seatpost is heavy (in bike terms) compared to other carbon seatposts.

It looks loverly though and it is quite stealth in its charcoal paint. Two friends of mine have a Scott Cr-1 (feels very light) and a Trek Domane 5.9 (feels similar to mine).

i wonder though how this would compare to the 10r frame (academic question only! I do not have that kind of money) and also I wonder weather it is good value for money compared to the original weight of about 9.2 KG with the 9-speed sora and Axis brakes and wheels.

what do you guys think? maybe I used too much grease?

DiscoBoy

I don't understand the question.

Enjoy your bike

imposter2.0

Can't see the pics..

ai_1

How much did your bike cost?
How much more would the 10r cost and what's the difference in frame weight compared with the 8r?
How much would the 9.2kg version have cost?
How bothered are you about weight? (What terrain do you ride? Do you race?)
What's money worth to you?

How much grease did you use?

markhewitt1978

Where's the pictures?

BikeAndEarly

pictures coming this wekeend; have been busy.

it was more like a rhetoric question. the frameset for the 11r would have cost £2600 on its own. My bike cost significantly less than that and it actually has wheels.

I was joking about the grease!

I was not sure how people achieve their 6.8 etc bikes! I thought by spending 2 grand it could be done

anyways please do not get me wrong. I am over the moon

me-109

8.1Kg CR1 inc pedals using 105 and that seemed a little on the heavy side compared to some 105 builds I've seen on the same frame. I'm sure you could swap out some components for lighter and cheaper (than the frame) if you reall want to).

wannabecyclist

How fast is it

tom_howard

I was not sure how people achieve their 6.8 etc bikes! I thought by spending 2 grand it could be done

RRP of mine starts with a 7 and it's 500g more than that. The ride is awesome though. As is the speed at which it covers ground. Weight on its own isn't everything.

sandyballs

Can I ask where you got the frameset from, I want to build one but do not want the £2500 S-Works?

downhill paul

What is the obsession with lightweight bikes?
unless you are seriously competing in races then carbon is pointless.
bike weight also makes no difference unless you are on a hill that is 10% or more.
bike fit and rider weight are more important.

bernithebiker

downhill paul wrote:

unless you are seriously competing in races then carbon is pointless.

bike weight also makes no difference unless you are on a hill that is 10% or more.

Hmmm, debatable to say the least....

dilatory

downhill paul wrote:

How it looks is more important.

I completely agree.

downhill paul

You agree with something that wasn't even said?
how foolish.

BrandonA

BikeAndEarly wrote:

i just finished building a Specialized Roubaix SL4 with a carbon 8r frame in Specialized-speak. The bike is fitted with a full Shimano Ultegra 6800 groupset (11-28 cassette) and Ultegra 6800 wheels with Continental Gatorskin Harshell tyres.
Over and above that it has:
1. 3T ergonova handlebars (aluminium)
2. 3T arx 100mm stem (aluminium)
3. Specialized Cobl Gobl-r seatpost
4. Specialized Body geometry saddle
5. Lizard Skins bar tape
6. 2 plastic water bottle cages (very light)

The bike came up to 8KG without pedals. I think it is decent because the wheels are not really that light and I have not gone all out (carbon) for stem, handlebars, and saddle. Also that cobl gobl-r seatpost is heavy (in bike terms) compared to other carbon seatposts.

It looks loverly though and it is quite stealth in its charcoal paint. Two friends of mine have a Scott Cr-1 (feels very light) and a Trek Domane 5.9 (feels similar to mine).

i wonder though how this would compare to the 10r frame (academic question only! I do not have that kind of money) and also I wonder weather it is good value for money compared to the original weight of about 9.2 KG with the 9-speed sora and Axis brakes and wheels.

what do you guys think? maybe I used too much grease?

If your question is "I wonder though how this would compare to the 10r frame" then you can probably do an internet search to find the weight of the two frames. The actual frame is quite a small percentage of the bike weight (not sure what though). Your weights and groupset are both significant, ultegra weights over 2kg alone, I imagine your wheels a similar amount.

I think you know where you could have saved some weight on more expensive components. Maybe over the coming years you can upgrade some of the components. The good thing is you've got a great bike to start with.

Enjoy the bike!

simon_masterson

You've lost less than the weight of 2 full bottles. How much do variations in the amount of fluid you take bother you?

But you saved a significant amount of weight and probably didn't break the bank, and it seems to be making you happy. There is a weight range defined by frame and fork and wheels, that every bike falls into; if you stick to that rather than spending hundreds to save a few grams on a bike that won't weigh 6 kg without drilling holes and cutting bits off, you can't go too far wrong. Quite often higher quality parts are lighter anyway.

d_o_g

No comment on the weight, but when they wear out, change the hardshells for Schwalbe Durano Plus. Amazing tyres, loads of grip and fantastic puncture resistance.

Pross

Tom Howard wrote:

I was not sure how people achieve their 6.8 etc bikes! I thought by spending 2 grand it could be done

RRP of mine starts with a 7 and it's 500g more than that. The ride is awesome though. As is the speed at which it covers ground. Weight on its own isn't everything.

Decent weight for a £700 bike.

Miles253

downhill paul wrote:

What is the obsession with lightweight bikes?
unless you are seriously competing in races then carbon is pointless.
bike weight also makes no difference unless you are on a hill that is 10% or more.
bike fit and rider weight are more important.

Bike fit and weight are important, but there are lots of other factors to consider. Carbon offers comfort, aesthetics and weight gains, some people like a light bike to beat strava times, if they enjoy it so what?

Justlearning1965

Why do ' weight weenies ', Not weight their bikes with pedals ?.
I cant understand. Maybe the op can let me know.
All the best
Max

downhill paul

Miles253 wrote:

downhill paul wrote:

What is the obsession with lightweight bikes?
unless you are seriously competing in races then carbon is pointless.
bike weight also makes no difference unless you are on a hill that is 10% or more.
bike fit and rider weight are more important.

Bike fit and weight are important, but there are lots of other factors to consider. Carbon offers comfort, aesthetics and weight gains, some people like a light bike to beat strava times, if they enjoy it so what?

I understand that some people like a light bike, but rider weight is far more important.
my specialized allez sport with mavic aksium race wheels weighs 10kg exactly, with pedals and bottle cages.
if I were to buy a bike right on the UCI weight limit of 6.2kg, it would weigh 3.8kg or 0.59 stone. such a bike would probably cost 10 times what my bike cost. or I could save the money and ride a bit harder to lose half a stone or more from my body weight. I currently weight just over 14 stone, so buying a bike that weighs just over half a stone less than a bike such as the one I currently own is pointless. if I weighed less then a bike lighter than my current bike would make a difference to my speed on flat roads and on climbs.
I have seen guys my size and bigger on really light bikes, personally I don't see the point of riding a carbon bike when you are over a certain weight. losing weight from your body would be far more beneficial and cheaper than buying a lighter bike. you can only go so light as far as a bike is concerned, with your body you can lose much weight as you can be bothered to.

charlie_potatoes

downhill paul wrote:

bike weight also makes no difference unless you are on a hill that is 10% or more.

downhill paul wrote:

if I weighed less then a bike lighter than my current bike would make a difference to my speed on flat roads and on climbs.

downhill paul wrote:

What is the obsession with lightweight bikes?

downhill paul wrote:

my specialized allez sport with mavic aksium race wheels weighs 10kg exactly, with pedals and bottle cages.
if I were to buy a bike right on the UCI weight limit of 6.2kg, it would weigh 3.8kg or 0.59 stone.

DavidJB

downhill paul wrote:

Miles253 wrote:

downhill paul wrote:

What is the obsession with lightweight bikes?
unless you are seriously competing in races then carbon is pointless.
bike weight also makes no difference unless you are on a hill that is 10% or more.
bike fit and rider weight are more important.

Bike fit and weight are important, but there are lots of other factors to consider. Carbon offers comfort, aesthetics and weight gains, some people like a light bike to beat strava times, if they enjoy it so what?

I understand that some people like a light bike, but rider weight is far more important.
my specialized allez sport with mavic aksium race wheels weighs 10kg exactly, with pedals and bottle cages.
if I were to buy a bike right on the UCI weight limit of 6.2kg, it would weigh 3.8kg or 0.59 stone. such a bike would probably cost 10 times what my bike cost. or I could save the money and ride a bit harder to lose half a stone or more from my body weight. I currently weight just over 14 stone, so buying a bike that weighs just over half a stone less than a bike such as the one I currently own is pointless. if I weighed less then a bike lighter than my current bike would make a difference to my speed on flat roads and on climbs.
I have seen guys my size and bigger on really light bikes, personally I don't see the point of riding a carbon bike when you are over a certain weight. losing weight from your body would be far more beneficial and cheaper than buying a lighter bike. you can only go so light as far as a bike is concerned, with your body you can lose much weight as you can be bothered to.

1. UCI weight limit is 6.8KG

2. The bike is 'dead weight' if you weigh more you generate more power. Yes a lighter is better overall as you'd have to put out less power to go up hill than a heavier rider would at the same speed (w/kg).

3. If people want to spend money to get a light bike who are you to say they shouldn't. I agree some porker spending 5k+ on a cervelo is amusing but it their money.

ai_1

downhill paul wrote:

What is the obsession with lightweight bikes?
unless you are seriously competing in races then carbon is pointless.
bike weight also makes no difference unless you are on a hill that is 10% or more.
bike fit and rider weight are more important.

By that sort of logic we should all ride the same basic bikes, ensure they fit and ignore everything else.
Sure weight isn't very relevant on the flat. Most of us won't notice or care about the small impact of bike weight on acceleration. However to say it makes no difference on hills under 10% is nonsense. Of course steeper hills mean a bigger impact but there's no magic numbers. Weight differences can be big or small, hills can be shallow or steep....It's a progression not a switch.
Sure theres often more potential to lose weight from the rider than the bike but that doesn't mean you have to chose. Why not use a lighter bike anyway? They're not mutually exclusive. You can have both. Your arguments just don't make sense!

bernithebiker

downhill paul wrote:

Miles253 wrote:

downhill paul wrote:

What is the obsession with lightweight bikes?
unless you are seriously competing in races then carbon is pointless.
bike weight also makes no difference unless you are on a hill that is 10% or more.
bike fit and rider weight are more important.

Bike fit and weight are important, but there are lots of other factors to consider. Carbon offers comfort, aesthetics and weight gains, some people like a light bike to beat strava times, if they enjoy it so what?

I understand that some people like a light bike, but rider weight is far more important.
my specialized allez sport with mavic aksium race wheels weighs 10kg exactly, with pedals and bottle cages.
if I were to buy a bike right on the UCI weight limit of 6.2kg, it would weigh 3.8kg or 0.59 stone. such a bike would probably cost 10 times what my bike cost. or I could save the money and ride a bit harder to lose half a stone or more from my body weight. I currently weight just over 14 stone, so buying a bike that weighs just over half a stone less than a bike such as the one I currently own is pointless. if I weighed less then a bike lighter than my current bike would make a difference to my speed on flat roads and on climbs.
I have seen guys my size and bigger on really light bikes, personally I don't see the point of riding a carbon bike when you are over a certain weight. losing weight from your body would be far more beneficial and cheaper than buying a lighter bike. you can only go so light as far as a bike is concerned, with your body you can lose much weight as you can be bothered to.

I weigh 10 stone (63kg ish) and my bike weighs 5.9kg. What should I do next Paul?

Anonymous

Gatorskin Hardshells :shock: Whats the point of a light bike if you have to slow down for corners?

Get some decent tyres and maybe latex inner tubes.

A light bike is great. Don't listen to all that cr4p about water bottle or body weight :roll:

rolf_f

Ai_1 wrote:

Sure theres often more potential to lose weight from the rider than the bike but that doesn't mean you have to chose. Why not use a lighter bike anyway? They're not mutually exclusive. You can have both. Your arguments just don't make sense!

To be fair, his sentences don't make sense so you can hardly expect much from his arguments!

downhill paul wrote:

you can only go so light as far as a bike is concerned, with your body you can lose much weight as you can be bothered to.

Too right. I'm going to knock 4 stone off my body weight. Now I currently weigh 9.5 stone so 4 off that is, errrr................

DavidJB

9.5 stone...get down to Greggs boy!

littledove44

My stock Roubaix with SL2 frame and Mavic wheels weighs 8kg (without pedals).

Trying to get it much lower is not easy.

itsnotarace

BikeAndEarly wrote:

I was not sure how people achieve their 6.8 etc bikes! I thought by spending 2 grand it could be done

Canyon Ultimate Al, 7.2Kg for £1699 http://www.canyon.com/_en/roadbikes/bik ... ab-reiter2

My CAAD9 weighs 7.4Kg (including pedals) with 1600g wheels and Ultegra 6800 groupset, and cost considerably less than 2k. No particularly trick bits on it either

You're doing it wrong

Colinthecop

BikeAndEarly wrote:

I was joking about the grease!

NEVER joke about the grease....!!!


:roll: