XC race mtb ...upgrade options to cut weight

The Rookie

njee20 wrote:

ravenvrider wrote:

Having been sucked into the upgrading path on both my road and mtb I can honestly say I think your best bet is to sell your bike and get a secondhand one for £1000. A friend just bought a mint 2012 Cannondale flash carbon 2 for £900...It weighs less than 8 kg and has a top end spec to match...bargain.

Upgrading kn my experience always seems to cost more than you expect...

No way is a Flash 2 sub 8kg. The top Hi-Mod barely squeaks that. 10kg perhaps.

Ferrals - no way will your wheels just weigh the sum total of manufacturers claimed weights, unless you get ridiculously lucky!

My front came out 6g under, the rear 7g over and that was down to the hub being that 7g over claimed. You can get surprisingly close I think.

Ferrals

Interestingly, doing the standing on weighing scales with and without bike method (not very accurate I don't think) my bike weighs bang on 11kg. According to the spec the original weight was 12.2kg. I switched the saddle which saved 100g, and also switched bars although I don't know how much that saved, but I think most of the loss came from going 1 by 10

The Rookie

Manufacturer weights often come out under, they 'weight' how they do it in their favour, 1x will lose you about 420g then you need to add on any chain guide weight, so I doubt you've dropped yours by 1.2kg whatever it weighed to start with (Boardman weights for example are without pedals!)

rockmonkeysc

I like Giant's policy of not publishing bike weights. They say that because there is no industry standard it makes claimed weights meaningless.
There is one bike in the Your Mountain Bikes forum with a very similar build to mine, same size frame and heavier tyres but the owner claims it's 3lb lighter than I have weighed mine! Everyone seems to be confused about weighing bikes.

njee20

Plenty of brands are the same - in fact Cannondale are unusual in declaring weights. There are all sorts of stupid 'traditions' - unpainted frames, no pedals etc.

WindyG

Cube are good with regard to bike weights, they do state that the smallest frame is used and without pedals and to add approx 250-300g with each frame size increase.

Ferrals

I guess it's like cars specified mpg which is calculated on all sorts of unrealistic test rigs

The Rookie

Well not quite (that's my day job) and the key thing with them is there is a legislated standard, so they are all tested the same.

rockmonkeysc

My local shop sells Intense bikes. They once told me the weight difference between the painted and raw Tracer 2. I forget the actual amount but it's a lot.

Ferrals

Any idea about frame tape, I figure that must negate some of the weight saving of carbon when people tape up the entire frame to protect from stone chips

The Rookie

Based on the fact that enough electrical tape to make a rim tape (26") weighs 5g, then yes, you could easily be adding 40-50g to the bike, and no I wouldn't on an XC lightweight race bike, I don't have it on my mega valuable (ahem) Carrera frame.

njee20

There isn't an inherent weight saving with carbon, but yes, adding frame tape does add weight. Still worth it if you want things to look nice IMO! If you're not bothered then I'd only add it where there's a real risk of damage without it.

ednino

My XC race bike cost about £800 to build and that's 9kg

Go X1 with gears to save weight, KCNC rotors, scandium stem/bars/seatpost, stans tubeless rims etc

njee20

It's got little wheels though. I'd take a weight penalty and go 29er for a race bike.

The Rookie

Looking at specs I can see I'm not convinced that's 9kg, even your build thread put it at 9.2.....still nice though.

rockmonkeysc

If that's 9kg I will eat my hat (a carbon Fox Rampage) it's got to be a good 10kg.

njee20

I'm inclined to agree, 10kg seems reasonable, light frame, light finishing kit. Those wheels are 1585g, so not super light. Likewise the fork.

The Rookie

Tyres are protection as well (so 570g ea according to Conti's website).....doing an add and delete versus mine I put it at about 9.7kg at an estimate.

WindyG

I think somebody has broken scales, I couldn't see how that would be 9kg, some nice light stuff yes but not enough to get down to that weight.

rockmonkeysc

Reminds me of a bike in Your Mountain Bikes which is the same as one of mine but with heavier forks yet the owner claims is four pounds lighter!

booldawg

I know the best and cheapest way to shed weight on my bike is to probably eat less and ride more!

njee20

And if you do that and save weight on the bike you're onto a winner!

ednino

[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19322524#p19322524]RockmonkeySC[/url] wrote:

If that's 9kg I will eat my hat (a carbon Fox Rampage) it's got to be a good 10kg.

That's on its heavier mud tyres

njee20

I'm still calling dodgy scales, even more so when it's got 700g tyres on it!

ednino

They weighed the road bike at 7.2kg, exactly the same as the shop scales so I have no reason to doubt them

The Rookie

Doesn't really matter, the weight of a bike has to equal the sum of the parts, and the sum of your parts puts it too far over that weight for it to be possible.

The weight of those tyres alone means you need to have an 8.7Kg capable bike there to offset the 1/2Kg you are giving away versus something like a pair of Ralph or Rons.