Lightest bike for £1,000

jbike2014

What is the lightest bike available for under £1,000?

Btwin FC7 is 8kg and costs £779 - not bad but they only have a size 51 left!

http://www.decathlon.co.uk/fc-7-road-bike-id_8203211.html

Any other bikes lighter than this for £1000?

cycleclinic

I built a 7.57kg bike for about £600 buy using a second hand trek frame, second hand parts of ebay and building the wheels myself. If I had been more cunning lighter would have been possible. I have made it alot hevaier now and enjoy it far more as a result. I mean 4000 miles from a hollow tech ultegra BB used in the dry is not good back to square taper.

I think a 7kg build with patience is possible for well under £1000.

maddog 2

have a look at the Canyons. They do pretty well.

The drop from 7 1/2 to 7 is usually pretty expensive though Malcolm

I managed to get my disc-brake build under 7.5 recently but it took some clever accounting.

vortice

I'd also say the canyons, but at that price the lightest bike is likely to be the one you build yourself.

sloppyschleckonds

Vortice wrote:

I'd also say the canyons, but at that price the lightest bike is likely to be the one you build yourself.

Out of Papier-mâché?

rickeverett

Rose do a couple of pretty lightweight aluminium builds with very good specs around the £1000 mark...

7.95kg - £846
http://www.rosebikes.co.uk/bike/rose-pr ... aid:668081

7.65kg - £1142
http://www.rosebikes.co.uk/bike/rose-pr ... aid:668381


You can lighten both of those further if you went with the RS1400 wheelset option which is 1.4kg. That will shave about 300g off. so both will be down to 7.65 and 7.35 kg size 57

At least you get something new and decent spec.

The other way is to go second hand lightweight parts and build.

vortice

SloppySchleckonds wrote:

Vortice wrote:

I'd also say the canyons, but at that price the lightest bike is likely to be the one you build yourself.

Out of Papier-mâché?

Just as an example, I managed to buy a BMC SLR 01 (2012) frame off ebay for £400, added SRAM force and ancillaries for a total of about £1000. Admittedly I already had wheels and bars, but it shows you can build a good bike on a budget. Very light, never weighed it but I'm guessing 6.5Kg.

jbike2014

Thanks, Yes, at the moment I think Rose are the lightest for the money but just wanted to check whether I could get anything lighter for cheaper although I think its not possible!

I was looking to get a new bike, but I agree that if I was to get something second hand maybe I would get more for my money. The reason I don't want to get a secondhand bike is that, expecially with carbon, I can't be sure how it has been ridden or whether the frame is cracked, so am a bit hesitant.

I know you may be able to build your own bike from new and maje it liught but I was just wondering if there is another bike company I haven't heard of that makes bikes lighter than 7.5kg for around £1,000...?

darkhairedlord

jbike2014 wrote:

Thanks, Yes, at the moment I think Rose are the lightest for the money but just wanted to check whether I could get anything lighter for cheaper although I think its not possible!

I was looking to get a new bike, but I agree that if I was to get something second hand maybe I would get more for my money. The reason I don't want to get a secondhand bike is that, expecially with carbon, I can't be sure how it has been ridden or whether the frame is cracked, so am a bit hesitant.

I know you may be able to build your own bike from new and maje it liught but I was just wondering if there is another bike company I haven't heard of that makes bikes lighter than 7.5kg for around £1,000...?

Why the obsession with finding the lightest for under a grand?

jbike2014

Because I have to travel up hills as well as drag the bike up a few flights of stairs, so lighter is better.

I heard that 1kg saved in bike weight is the equivalent of the rider being 11-12kg lighter. I think its easier to find a lighter bike than lose 12kg.

darkhairedlord

jbike2014 wrote:

Because I have to travel up hills as well as drag the bike up a few flights of stairs, so lighter is better.

I heard that 1kg saved in bike weight is the equivalent of the rider being 11-12kg lighter. I think its easier to find a lighter bike than lose 12kg.

a kilogramme off the bike is the same as a kilogramme off the rider. It's the total mass that your legs have to get up the hill.

maddog 2

How much does the £1k Boardman weigh?

marcusjb

jbike2014 wrote:

Because I have to travel up hills as well as drag the bike up a few flights of stairs, so lighter is better.

I heard that 1kg saved in bike weight is the equivalent of the rider being 11-12kg lighter. I think its easier to find a lighter bike than lose 12kg.

Simply b***ocks.

As darkhairedlord says, it is the same - you are lifting yourself and the bike up however many metres. The work required to do so is the same if you are a 60Kg rider with a 10Kg bike as a 63Kg rider with a 7Kg bike.

Rotating weight is slightly different, but certainly not 11-12 times different either.

supermurph09

jbike2014 wrote:

Because I have to travel up hills as well as drag the bike up a few flights of stairs, so lighter is better.

I heard that 1kg saved in bike weight is the equivalent of the rider being 11-12kg lighter. I think its easier to find a lighter bike than lose 12kg.

You heard wrong I'm afraid. Losing 1KG from a bike be slightly noticeable, losing 10KG (assuming you didnt lose all your power) would make a massive difference.

jbike2014

The Boardman Pro Carbon, which is £1299 at Halfords, weighs 8kg.

The Boardman Pro Carbon SLR, which weighs 7.55kg is, however, £1799 at Halfords.

I have heard that they are good bikes but price to weight ratio wseems a little worse than the Rose. Thanks for the suggestion though.

jbike2014

If you lost 10kg you would also lose some muscle so you would not feel the full effect of the weight loss verses if you lose weight of the bike you get the full effect.

I am sure there are many posts debating losing body weight versus losing bike weight but for the purposes of this thread I was simply wondering, as a matter of fact, which are the lightest bikes for £1k (that can be bought new and don't require me to self-build using second hand parts).

At the moment I think its Rose but I was just trying to get any ideas from anyone if they knew of lighter bikes.

Thanks.

borisface

jbike2014 wrote:

If you lost 10kg you would also lose some muscle so you would not feel the full effect of the weight loss verses if you lose weight of the bike you get the full effect.

Nonsense.

A) Cycling is an endurance sport. Muscle is not a limiter of performance which is why you don't see many guys with massive muscles doing well at it, unless a track sprinter. Most people could afford to lose muscle bulk without any drop in performance.

Even if you lost muscle (which unless your bodyfat is well under 10% is unlikely) your profile would be smaller thereby gaining an aerodynamic advantage.

I'd be sceptical about the real world weights of the rose bikes as the frames seem to be 1200gs which is about the same as a PX but somehow comes out in the end about a kilo lighter. Perhaps someone on here would be kind enough to weigh theirs for you?

keef66

I'd suggest that you stop obsessing about weight and choose a bike based on your budget and the kind of riding you do.

Unless you find the stuff over on Weight Weenies exciting, in which case you need a bigger budget or a Dremel, nerves of steel and a good dentist.

curto80

jbike2014 wrote:

If you lost 10kg you would also lose some muscle so you would not feel the full effect of the weight loss verses if you lose weight of the bike you get the full effect.

I am sure there are many posts debating losing body weight versus losing bike weight but for the purposes of this thread I was simply wondering, as a matter of fact, which are the lightest bikes for £1k (that can be bought new and don't require me to self-build using second hand parts).

At the moment I think its Rose but I was just trying to get any ideas from anyone if they knew of lighter bikes.

Thanks.

Next time read the forum rules. You can't ask a straightforward question and expect a factual answer on this forum. You have to have your entire existence scrutinised instead. Forum law I'm afraid

cougie

Get a really small frame. That would be the lighter one.

As everyone has said though - its not all about weight. Get a decent one that fits you rather than the lightest thats made of paper and your bottom bracket waves in the wind.

holiver

Aye it's the fit that is going to enable you to use your power most efficiently!

meanredspider

Yes - the weight of bike vs rider is clearly nonsense. As you emptied your bidon you'd slow down drastically.

The great thing about losing weight off the rider (as someone who has just shed 10kg) is that the 10kg is off you all the time - not just when you're riding. On the downside (tongue in cheek) I had to buy new jeans.

A light bike is a thing of joy but not something to obsess over. Something that is light but not very stiff would not be nice. Light wheels are great but they, too, need to be good quality.

TerryCTR

jbike2014 wrote:

If you lost 10kg you would also lose some muscle so you would not feel the full effect of the weight loss verses if you lose weight of the bike you get the full effect.

I am sure there are many posts debating losing body weight versus losing bike weight but for the purposes of this thread I was simply wondering, as a matter of fact, which are the lightest bikes for £1k (that can be bought new and don't require me to self-build using second hand parts).

At the moment I think its Rose but I was just trying to get any ideas from anyone if they knew of lighter bikes.

Thanks.

Muscle is heavier than fat so you could actually lose fat, gain muscle and be heavier at the end.

Its a fine line, the more muscle you have the more fat your body will burn at rest making you lighter vs all out slimline for cycling.